Digests

Thanni v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

IMM-2132-00

2001 FCT 353, Blais J.

19/4/01

13 pp.

Application for leave and judicial review of Refugee Division (the panel) decision applicant not Convention refugee--Applicant, citizen of Nigeria, alleged well-founded fear of persecution owing to his political opinions--Panel rendered decision at hearing, finding that in general applicant did not have very important role as political activist distributing new information and speaking to people (since his role consisted of)--Panel's written reasons contain some additional reasons in support of its conclusion--Main issue: whether panel erred in adding in its written decision some reasons not appearing in its oral decision--Application allowed--Case law requiring some conformity between written and oral reasons--Applicable test whether differences between written and oral reasons substantial--Herein, panel's conclusion same and oral reasons all appear in written reasons--However, difference between written reasons and oral reasons "substantial" since number of written reasons added--If panel chooses to render its decision at conclusion of hearing, it must be concluded that panel has completed its thinking about case and ready to present its decision and reasons for it--If panel continues to deliberate afterwards on question and even to add some reasons to its decision, one could easily be led to believe that its thinking had not ended--Case law readily accepts panel may make some corrections in its written decision for purposes of syntax and comprehension; to accept panel could perfect its decision because it had forgotten to address one or two questions that it thought were important to review of its case would constitute miscarriage of justice--Therefore panel erred in adding in its written decision some reasons that did not appear in oral decision, and this error warrants intervention of Court.