Cuaton v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JN.040

• Judge: Fothergill, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: May 12, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JN.040;2015 FC 712

Cuaton v. Can. (M.C.I.), [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JN.040

MLB being edited

Currently being edited for F.T.R. - judgment temporarily in rough form.

Temp. Cite: [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. JN.040

Grace Cuaton (applicant) v. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (respondent)

(IMM-4202-14; 2015 FC 712)

Indexed As: Cuaton v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Federal Court

Fothergill, J.

June 5, 2015.

Summary:

The applicant, a citizen of the Philippines, applied for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. An immigration officer refused the application. The applicant applied for judicial review.

The Federal Court allowed the application and remitted the matter to a different immigration officer for reconsideration.

Aliens - Topic 4

Definitions and general principles - Children - [See Aliens - Topic 1206 ].

Aliens - Topic 1206

Admission - Immigrants - General - Upon compassionate or humanitarian grounds - Cuaton, a citizen of the Philippines, arrived in Canada in October 2010 - Her child was born in June 2011 - In December 2013, Cuaton applied for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds - An immigration officer refused the application - The Federal Court allowed Cuaton's application for judicial review - First, nowhere in the decision did the officer identify or define the best interests of the child - The officer's bald assertion that "the best interests of the child [were taken] into account" was insufficient - Second, it was inconsistent for the officer to concede the enormous devastation that was being faced by all Filipinos in areas affected by Typhoon Haiyan, and then to conclude that Cuaton would not experience hardship if she were to return to one of those affected areas - This aspect of the officer's decision was also unreasonable - See paragraphs 9 to 17.

Cases Noticed:

Judnarine v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2013), 425 F.T.R. 312; 2013 FC 82, refd to. [para. 9].

Mandi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2014] F.T.R. Uned. 149; 2014 FC 257, refd to. [para. 9].

Kolosovs v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2008), 323 F.T.R. 181; 2008 FC 165, refd to. [para. 9].

Williams v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2012] F.T.R. Uned. 79; 2012 FC 166, refd to. [para. 10].

Chandidas v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2013), 429 F.T.R. 55; 2013 FC 258, refd to. [para. 10].

Hawthorne v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2002), 297 N.R. 187; 2002 FCA 475, refd to. [para. 10].

Webb v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2012), 417 F.T.R. 306; 2012 FC 1060, refd to. [para. 10].

Owusu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2004), 318 N.R. 300; 2004 FCA 38, refd to. [para. 11].

Westmore v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2012), 417 F.T.R. 88; 2012 FC 1023, refd to. [para. 12].

Chekroun v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2013), 436 F.T.R. 1; 2013 FC 737, refd to. [para. 12].

Legault v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2002), 288 N.R. 174; 2002 FCA 125, refd to. [para. 13].

Kanthasamy v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2014), 459 N.R. 367; 2014 FCA 113, refd to. [para. 14].

Gonzalez v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2015] F.T.R. TBEd. MR.066; 2015 FC 382, refd to. [para. 15].

Maroukel et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2015] F.T.R. Uned. 17; 2015 FC 83, refd to. [para. 17].

Lauture et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2015] F.T.R. Uned. 107; 2015 FC 336, refd to. [para. 17].

Sebbe et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2012), 414 F.T.R. 268; 2012 FC 813, refd to. [para. 19].

El Thaher v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2012] F.T.R. Uned. 773; 2012 FC 1439, refd to. [para. 20].

New Brunswick (Board of Management) v. Dunsmuir (2008), 372 N.R. 1; 329 N.B.R.(2d) 1; 844 A.P.R. 1; 2008 SCC 9, refd to. [para. 20].

Counsel:

Leigh Salsberg, for the applicant;

Christopher Ezrin, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Eugenia Cappellaro Zavaleta, Toronto, Ontario, for the applicant;

William F. Pentney, Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application for judicial review was heard at Toronto, Ontario, on May 12, 2015, before Fothergill, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment and reasons at Ottawa, Ontario, on June 5, 2015.