Faghihi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Faghihi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2001-05-23 Neutral citation 2001 FCA 163 File numbers A-534-99 Notes Digest Decision Content Date: 20010523 Docket: A-534-99 Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 163 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SHARLOW J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: ALI FAGHIHI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, Wednesday, May 23, 2001 Judgment delivered at Toronto, Ontario, on Wednesday, May 23, 2001 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: MALONE J.A. Date: 20010523 Docket: A-534-99 Neutral citation: 2001 FCA 163 CORAM: LINDEN J.A. SHARLOW J.A. MALONE J.A. BETWEEN: ALI FAGHIHI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario on Wednesday, May 23, 2001) MALONE J.A. This is an appeal from the order of a Motions Judge dated August 17, 1999 dismissing the appellant's application for judicial review, pursuant to subsection 82.1(6) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2 (the "Act"), of the decision by a Member of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board ("CRDD") denying the appellant's application to reopen his Convention refugee claim. The Motions Judge certified the following question for appeal pursuant to subsection 83(1) of the Act: Is the Refugee Division properly constituted by a single member when determining a motion to reopen on the ground of procedural unfairness a decision of a panel dismissing the applicant's claim to be recognized as a refugee in Canada? We are all of the view that the certified question should be answered in the affirmative. We agree with the Motions Judge that a single CRDD member may sit on a motion to reopen a refugee claim, and we endorse his reasons for that conclusion. The appellant also argues that he was denied a fair hearing by the CRDD panel that first heard his claim, and for that reason the CRDD member erred in denying his motion to reopen. The Motions Judge rejected this argument. We are all of the view that he was correct to do so. The appellant's fundamental complaint is that the CRDD panel in the initial hearing reached an erroneous factual conclusion because of a mistranslation on the appellant's personal information form that was not noticed by the appellant until two years after the hearing. We agree with the Motions Judge that the right to a fair hearing is not infringed when the CRDD relies on a personal information form that was translated prior to the hearing, and has no reason to suspect that a translation error has occurred. The appeal will be dismissed. "B. Malone" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record DOCKET: A-534-99 STYLE OF CAUSE: ALI FAGHIHI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent DATE OF HEARING: WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 2001 PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: MALONE J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH AT TORONTO, ONTARIO ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 2001. APPEARANCES BY: Mr. Isak Grushka For the Appellant Ms. Marianne Zoric For the Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Isak Grushka Barrister and Solicitor 12657A St. Clair Avenue West Suite 7 Toronto, Ontario M6E 1B8 For the Appellant Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada For the Respondent FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL Date: 20010523 Docket: A-534-99 BETWEEN: ALI FAGHIHI Appellant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT