Nanatakyi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), (1994) 86 F.T.R. 28 (TD)

• Judge: Muldoon, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: September 26, 1994
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1994), 86 F.T.R. 28 (TD)

Nanatakyi v. Can. (M.C.I.) (1994), 86 F.T.R. 28 (TD)

MLB headnote and full text

Kingsley Nanatakyi (applicant) v. The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (respondent)

(IMM-2020-93)

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

Federal Court of Canada

Trial Division

Muldoon, J.

October 11, 1994.

Summary:

A native of Ghana sought to apply for landing from within Canada on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. An immigration officer denied the request. The Ghanaian applied for judicial review of the decision.

The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, dismissed the application.

Aliens - Topic 1206

Admission - Immigrants - Upon compassionate or humanitarian grounds - Immigration officers denied a native of Ghana permission to apply, on compassionate and humanitarian grounds, for landed immigrant status from within Canada - He applied for judicial review of the decision - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, stated that a humanitarian and compassionate review is of a purely administrative nature and the court's intervention is only justified where (a) procedural fairness has not been observed; (b) the discretion was exercised unreasonably or in bad faith; (c) the discretion was exercised on irrelevant considerations; or (d) there has been a failure to consider all the relevant circumstances and evidence.

Aliens - Topic 1230

Admission - Immigrants - Application for admission - Immigrant visa - Duty of officer (incl. duty of fairness) - A native of Ghana sought permission to apply for landed immigrant status from within Canada on humanitarian and compassionate grounds - Immigration officers denied the request - The Ghanaian applied for judicial review of the decision, claiming that he should have been granted an interview - The Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, determined that the immigration officers had not failed in the duty to act fairly - A hearing was not mandatory unless an opportunity was required to provide further information or explain inconsistencies - See paragraphs 16 to 19.

Cases Noticed:

O'Grady v. Whyte, [1983] 1 F.C. 719; 42 N.R. 608; 138 D.L.R.(3d) 167 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

Said v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1992] 2 F.C. 728; 55 F.T.R. 81; 91 D.L.R.(4th) 400 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Ha v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1992), 56 F.T.R. 74; 8 Admin. L.R.(2d) 59 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Sobrie v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1987), 3 Imm. L.R.(2d) 81 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Lowe and Lacrette v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1987), 16 F.T.R. 124; 4 Imm. L.R.(2d) 85 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Kaur v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1987), 5 Imm. L.R.(2d) 148 (F.C.T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Koutsouveli v. Ministre de l'Emploi et de l'Immigration (1988), 21 F.T.R. 271; 6 Imm. L.R.(2d) 152 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Jebnoun v. Ministre de l'Emploi et de l'Immigration (1993), 68 F.T.R. 14 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Yeboah v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1993), 68 F.T.R. 241 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Sellakkandu v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1993), 68 F.T.R. 291 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 16].

Ramoutar v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1993), 65 F.T.R. 32 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 19].

Dick v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1992), 52 F.T.R. 318 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 20].

Dawkins v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1991), 45 F.T.R. 198 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 20].

Vidal and Dadwah v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1991), 41 F.T.R. 118; 13 Imm. L.R.(2d) 123 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 20].

Rajpaul v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1991), 44 F.T.R. 161; 13 Imm. L.R.(2d) 17 (T.D.), affd. (1993), 154 N.R. 235 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Aujla v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1991), 132 N.R. 45; 13 Imm. L.R.(2d) 81 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 20].

Rafighi v. Canada (Secretary of State) (1994), 81 F.T.R. 149 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 20].

Statutes Noticed:

Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2, sect. 2(1) [para. 7]; sect. 114(2) [para. 14].

Counsel:

Murray Tkatch, for the applicant;

Marie-Louise Wcislo, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Tkatch & Young, Toronto, Ontario, for the applicant;

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

This application was heard on September 26, 1994, at Toronto, Ontario, before Muldoon, J., of the Federal Court of Canada, Trial Division, who delivered the following judgment on October 11, 1994.