De Marigny v Langlais,

• Judge: Rand J.,Kellock J.
• Date: 07 April 1948
• Docket Number: Case No. 63
• Court: Supreme Court (Canada)

Canada, Supreme Court of Quebec.

Quebec, Court of King's Bench (Appeal Side).

Supreme Court of Canada.

(Lague, J.)

(Letourneau, C.J., St. Jacques, Gagné, Casey and Mackinnon, JJ.)

(Rinfret, C.J.C., Kerwin, Taschereau, Rand and Kellock, JJ.)

Case No. 63

De Marigny

and

Langlais.

British Commonwealth of Nations — Entry of British Subject — Deportation.

Aliens — Expulsion of — Entry on Temporary Permit — Subsequent Deportation Order — Arrest and Detention — Habeas Corpus — British Commonwealth of Nations — Entry of British Subject — Canada.

The Facts.—De Marigny, a British subject, born on the Island of Mauritius, arrived in Canada on March 15, 1945, from Cuba as a member of the crew of a ship which was sold in Canada. On arrival in Canada de Marigny was granted a temporary permit to stay in the country for two months. At the expiration of that time he applied for permanent admission to Canada and presented himself before a Board of Inquiry set up under the Immigration Act, 1927 (Can.). His application was for various reasons refused and a deportation order was made against him, under which it was ordered that he be deported forthwith to the place in the country whence he came to Canada or to the country of his birth or citizenship. An appeal against the decision of the Board was dismissed. De Marigny was given the opportunity of leaving the country voluntarily and his permission to stay was extended for a time. On May 3, 1947, he was taken into custody preparatory to being deported. He applied for a writ of habeas corpus. Among the grounds for his petition he relied on the submissions, firstly, that as a British subject he had a right to stay in Canada indefinitely, and secondly, that the deportation order necessarily implied an extraterritorial and, therefore, invalid restriction upon his movements as a British subject outside Canada.

Held (in all the Courts): that the petition must be refused. A British subject does not have the right to enter or stay in any part of the British Commonwealth of Nations. The admitted power to deport necessarily implies the power to impose extraterritorial restraint, and accordingly there is no substance in the objection that a statute giving power to deport is for that reason invalid.

The above-mentioned submissions were most adequately dealt with by the Court of King's Bench of Quebec (Appeal Side). Per Casey, J.:

“Finally, we come to the consideration of appellant's contention that the attempt to deport him to Mauritius...