Ngo v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 609

• Judge: Blanchard, J.
• Court: Federal Court (Canada)
• Case Date: April 19, 2005
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: 2005 FC 609;(2005), 275 F.T.R. 280 (FC)

Ngo v. Can. (M.C.I.) (2005), 275 F.T.R. 280 (FC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2005] F.T.R. TBEd. MY.040

Minh Chi Ngo (applicant) v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (respondent)

(IMM-8333-04; 2005 FC 609)

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

Federal Court

Blanchard, J.

May 3, 2005.

Summary:

The Immigration Appeal Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IAD) ruled that Ngo, a citizen of Vietnam, was inadmissible because he had committed a crime (fraud) outside Canada and a deportation order was issued. Ngo applied for judicial review.

The Federal Court allowed the application where the IAD erred in failing to consider whether Ngo's actions, if committed in Canada, would constitute fraud within the meaning of s. 380 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Aliens - Topic 1643

Exclusion and expulsion - Immigration - Deportation - Grounds for - Criminal conviction or activity which would constitute an offence - The Immigration Appeal Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board ruled that Ngo, a citizen of Vietnam, was inadmissible because he had committed a crime outside Canada (fraud) and a deportation order was issued - Ngo applied for judicial review - The Federal Court allowed the application where the IAD erred in failing to consider whether Ngo's actions, if committed in Canada, would constitute fraud within the meaning of s. 380 of the Criminal Code of Canada - The court discussed how the IAD should have conducted its equivalency analysis - See paragraphs 1 to 27.

Cases Noticed:

Chiau v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1998] 2 F.C. 642; 141 F.T.R. 81 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 14].

Brannson v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1981] 2 F.C. 141; 34 N.R. 411 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 15].

Hill v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1987), 73 N.R. 815 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

Dayan v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1987] 2 F.C. 569; 78 N.R. 134 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

Steward v. Minister of Employment and Immigration, [1988] 3 F.C. 452; 84 N.R. 240 (F.C.A.), refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Zlatic (Z.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 29; 151 N.R. 81; 54 Q.A.C 161; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 466, refd to. [para. 20].

R. v. Théroux (R.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 5; 151 N.R. 104; 54 Q.A.C. 184; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 449; 19 C.R.(4th) 194; 100 D.L.R.(4th) 624, refd to. [para. 20].

Statutes Noticed:

Immigration and Refugee Protection Act , S.C. 2001, c. 27, sect. 33 [para. 10]; sect. 36(1)(c) [para. 7].

Counsel:

Vonnie E. Rochester, for the applicant;

Ian Demers, for the respondent.

Solicitors of Record:

Vonnie E. Rochester, Montreal, Quebec, for the applicant;

John H. Sims, Q.C., Deputy Attorney General of Canada, Montréal, Quebec, for the respondent.

This application was heard in Montréal, Quebec, on April 19, 2005, before Blanchard, J., of the Federal Court, who delivered the following judgment on May 3, 2005, in Ottawa, Ontario.