Ellero v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2008 FC 1364

• Judge: Shore, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: December 11, 2008
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: 2008 FC 1364;(2008), 338 F.T.R. 215 (FC)

Ellero v. Can. (2008), 338 F.T.R. 215 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2009] F.T.R. TBEd. JA.005

Michael Ellero (applicant) v. The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (respondent)

(IMM-4523-08; 2008 FC 1364)

Indexed As: Ellero v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)

Federal Court

Shore, J.

December 11, 2008.

Summary:

Ellero came to Canada from the United States. His claim for refugee status was rejected and applications for review were dismissed. Ellero's application for a pre-removal risk assessment was dismissed. He sought judicial review and applied for a stay of the removal order.

The Federal Court dismissed the application.

Aliens - Topic 1800

Exclusion and expulsion - Deportation and exclusion of persons in Canada - Deportation or removal order - Stay of (incl. termination of stay) - Ellero came to Canada from the United States - He claimed refugee protection on the basis that members of the Mexican or Italian mafia wanted to eliminate him - He had not sought protection in the U.S. because he believed that the police could not provide physical protection for him against "the evils and perils of the world" - His claim for refugee status was rejected and applications for review were dismissed - Ellero's application for a pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA) was dismissed - He sought judicial review and applied for a stay of the removal order - The Federal Court dismissed the application - Ellero failed to demonstrate "special and compelling circumstances" that would warrant "exceptional judicial intervention" of a stay - Ellero's application failed on all three arms of the tri-partite test - There was no serious issue to be tried - The underlying decision was reasonable and all of the evidence had been considered - Ellero's subjective fear of returning to the U.S. did not establish irreparable harm - Objective evidence of harm related to danger was required - The balance of convenience favoured the Minister - Ellero was ready for removal and the Minister was under a statutory obligation to ensure that Ellero's removal was carried out as soon as reasonably possible - No statutory provision existed for a stay pending review of a PRRA decision - This indicated that Parliament intended that failed PRRA applicants could be removed prior to their judicial review applications being determined - See paragraphs 18 to 57.

Cases Noticed:

Aquila et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2000] F.T.R. Uned. 19; 94 A.C.W.S.(3d) 960 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 1].

Kerrutt v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1992), 53 F.T.R. 93; 32 A.C.W.S.(3d) 621 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 1].

Dugonitsch v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1992), 53 F.T.R. 314; 32 A.C.W.S.(3d) 1135 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 1].

Toth v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1988), 86 N.R. 302; 11 A.C.W.S.(3d) 440 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 18].

RJR-MacDonald Inc. et Imperial Tobacco Ltd. v. Canada (Procureur général), [1994] 1 S.C.R. 311; 164 N.R. 1; 60 Q.A.C. 241, refd to. [para. 18].

Oberlander v. Canada (Attorney General) (2003), 303 N.R. 104; 121 A.C.W.S.(3d) 610; 2003 FCA 134, refd to. [para. 18].

Tavaga v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1991), 15 Imm. L.R.(2d) 82; 28 A.C.W.S.(3d) 371 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 19].

Apotex Inc. and Novopharm Ltd. v. Wellcome Foundation Ltd. (1998), 232 N.R. 40; 82 C.P.R.(3d) 429 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 19].

Metropolitan Stores (MTS) Ltd. v. Manitoba Food and Commercial Workers, Local 832 and Labour Board (Man.), [1987] 1 S.C.R. 110; 73 N.R. 341; 46 Man.R.(2d) 241, refd to. [para. 21].

Rahman v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2001] F.T.R. Uned. 59; 103 A.C.W.S.(3d) 153 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 22].

Molnar v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2001] F.T.R. Uned. 212; 104 A.C.W.S.(3d) 1104; 2001 FCT 325, refd to. [para. 22].

Kaybaki v. Canada (Solicitor General), [2004] F.T.R. Uned. 22; 128 A.C.W.S.(3d) 784; 2004 FC 32, refd to. [para. 28].

Raza v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) et al. (2007), 370 N.R. 344; 2007 FCA 385, refd to. [para. 34].

Quiroga et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2006] F.T.R. Uned. 758; 153 A.C.W.S.(3d) 192; 2006 FC 1306, refd to. [para. 34].

Figurado v. Canada (Solicitor General), [2004] F.T.R. Uned. 119; 129 A.C.W.S.(3d) 374; 2004 FC 241, refd to. [para. 35].

Soriano v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2000), 188 F.T.R. 58; 7 Imm. L.R.(3d) 181 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 36].

Mikhailov et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2000), 191 F.T.R. 1; 97 A.C.W.S.(3d) 727 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 37].

Frankowski v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2000] F.T.R. Uned. 162; 98 A.C.W.S.(3d) 641 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 37].

Ram v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (1996), 64 A.C.W.S.(3d) 657 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 38].

Gogna v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1993), 68 F.T.R. 140; 42 A.C.W.S.(3d) 480 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 38].

Paul v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2007), 310 F.T.R. 307; 2007 FC 398, refd to. [para. 40].

Canada (Attorney General) v. Ward, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 689; 153 N.R. 321, refd to. [para. 40].

Akyol v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2003] F.T.R. Uned. 503; 124 A.C.W.S.(3d) 1119; 2003 FC 931, refd to. [para. 46].

Iwekaogwo v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2006] F.T.R. Uned. 898; 157 A.C.W.S.(3d) 392; 2006 FC 782, refd to. [para. 46].

Golubyev v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2007] F.T.R. Uned. 244; 156 A.C.W.S.(3d) 1147; 2007 FC 394, refd to. [para. 47].

Manohararaj v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), [2006] F.T.R. Uned. 243; 147 A.C.W.S.(3d) 600; 2006 FC 376, refd to. [para. 47].

Cupid v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2007] F.T.R. Uned. 104; 155 A.C.W.S.(3d) 396; 2007 FC 176, refd to. [para. 49].

Radji et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) et al. (2007), 308 F.T.R. 175; 2007 FC 100, refd to. [para. 50].

Singh (Jagnaraine) v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), [2006] F.T.R. Uned. 613; 151 A.C.W.S.(3d) 898; 2006 FC 1033, refd to. [para. 55].

Counsel:

Michael Ellero, for the applicant;

Sharon Johnston, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

John H. Sims, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, for the respondent.

This application was heard at Ottawa, Ontario, on December 11, 2008, by Shore, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment on the same date.