Segasayo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)
Because the Federal Court judge, on the basis of his own reasoning, was not required to determine the certified question and in fact made no determination of it, the certified question did not give rise to a right of appeal; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- 2010 FCA 296
- Parties
- Appellant: Maximin Segasayo; Respondent: The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
- Court
- Federal Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 4 November 2010
- Procedural Posture
- Judicial Review (immigration) / Appeal to Federal Court of Appeal From Federal Court Decision
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Certification of Question, Right of Appeal, Judicial Review
- 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
Maximin Segasayo
Appellant
The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review (immigration) / Appeal to Federal Court of Appeal From Federal Court Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the certified question certified by the Federal Court judge gave rise to a right of appeal
- 2 Whether the Federal Court judge was required to decide the certified question to dispose of the application for judicial review
Ratio Decidendi
Because the Federal Court judge, on the basis of his own reasoning, was not required to determine the certified question and in fact made no determination of it, the certified question did not give rise to a right of appeal; accordingly the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Segasayo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2010-11-04 Neutral citation 2010 FCA 296 File numbers A-102-10 Decision Content Date: 20101104 Docket: A-102-10 Citation: 2010 FCA 296 CORAM: NOËL J.A. PELLETIER J.A. MAINVILLE J.A. BETWEEN: MAXIMIN SEGASAYO Appellant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent Hearing held at Montréal, Quebec, on November 4, 2010. Judgment delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November 4, 2010. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A. Date: 20101104 Docket: A-102-10 Citation: 2010 FCA 296 CORAM: NOËL J.A. PELLETIER J.A. MAINVILLE J.A. BETWEEN: MAXIMIN SEGASAYO Appellant and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the bench at Montréal, Quebec, on November 4, 2010.) NOËL J.A. [1] The Federal Court Judge, on the basis of his own reasoning, was not required to determine the question that he certified in order to dispose of the application for judicial review, which explains why he made no determination. It follows that this question does not give rise to a right of appeal (see Varela v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2009] F.C.J. No. 549). [2] Accordingly, the appeal will be dismissed. “Marc Noël” J.A. Certified true translation Francie Gow, BCL, LLB FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-102-10 (APPEAL FROM A DECISION OF THE FEDERAL COURT, DATED FEBRUARY 18, 2010, IN DOCKET IMM-3367-09) STYLE OF CAUSE: MAXIMIN SEGASAYO v. M.C.I. PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec DATE OF HEARING: November 4, 2010 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: NOËL J.A. PELLETIER J.A. MAINVILLE J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH: November 4, 2010 APPEARANCES: Jacques Beauchemin FOR THE APPELLANT Michel Pépin FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Jacques Beauchemin FOR THE APPELLANT Myles J. Kirvan Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT