Townsend v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
The Court held that IRPR subsection 326(2), which refers to IRPA subsection 64(1) but not subsection 64(2), operates to bar an appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division for a person convicted of an offence punishable in Canada by less than two years who was found to be a 'danger to the public' under former...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2004 FCA 436
- Parties
- Appellant: Alwyn Lloyd Townsend; Respondent: The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 15 December 2004
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal — Federal Court of Appeal / Final Judgment
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed; certified question answered in the affirmative.
- Legal Topics
- Right of Appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division (iad), Effect of Former Immigration Act S.70(5) Findings of 'danger to the Public', Interaction Between IRPA S.64(1) and S.64(2) and IRPR S.326(2), Regulatory Exclusion of Appeal Rights
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Alwyn Lloyd Townsend
Appellant
The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Appeal — Federal Court of Appeal / Final Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether IRPR s.326(2), by referring to IRPA s.64(1) but not s.64(2), bars an appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division for a person convicted of an offence punishable in Canada by less than two years and found to be a 'danger to the public' under former Immigration Act s.70(5)
Ratio Decidendi
The Court held that IRPR subsection 326(2), which refers to IRPA subsection 64(1) but not subsection 64(2), operates to bar an appeal to the Immigration Appeal Division for a person convicted of an offence punishable in Canada by less than two years who was found to be a 'danger to the public' under former Immigration Act s.70(5).
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed; certified question answered in the affirmative.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed.
- Certified question answered in the positive that IRPR s.326(2) bars the described appeal to the IAD.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Townsend v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2004-12-15 Neutral citation 2004 FCA 436 File numbers A-167-04 Decision Content Date: 20041215 Docket: A-167-04 Citation: 2004 FCA 436 CORAM: LÉTOURNEAU J.A. SEXTON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: ALWYN LLOYD TOWNSEND Appellant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on December 15th, 2004. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on December 15th, 2004. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A. Date: 20041215 Docket: A-167-04 Citation: 2004 FCA 436 CORAM: LÉTOURNEAU J.A. SEXTON J.A. SHARLOW J.A. BETWEEN: ALWYN LLOYD TOWNSEND Appellant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on December 15, 2004) LÉTOURNEAU J.A. [1] Notwithstanding the able arguments of Mr. Crane, we are in full agreement with the findings and conclusions of Kelen J. [2] Therefore the appeal will be dismissed and the following certified question will be answered in the positive: If a person has been convicted of a crime that was punished in Canada by a term of imprisonment of less than two years, and found to be a "danger to the public" under subsection 70(5) of the former Immigration Act so that person had no right of an appeal to the IAD under the former Immigration Act, does subsection 326(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, which refers to subsection 64(1) of IRPA but not subsection 64(2) of IRPA, bar an appeal to the IAD_ "Gilles Létourneau" J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-167-04 STYLE OF CAUSE: ALWYN LLOYD TOWNSEND Appellant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: DECEMBER 15, 2004 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT: (LÉTOURNEAU, SEXTON, SHARLOW, J.J.A.) DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: LÉTOURNEAU J.A. APPEARANCES: Mr. Michael Crane FOR THE APPELLANT Ms. Ann Margaret Oberst Ms. Deborah Drukarsh FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Michael Crane Barrister & Solicitor Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPELLANT Morris Rosenberg Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT