CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Immigration Practice |
Maheswaran v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-6215-99
Rothstein J.A.
26/10/00
12 pp.
Application for judicial review of decision refusing applicants permission to introduce evidence in Refugee Division (RD) proceedings (application by Minister to have RD vacate earlier determination applicants Convention refugees, on basis applicants misled RD) to respond to Minister's new evidence--Applicants conceded misrepresentation, but invoked Act, s. 69.3(5) (RD may exercise its discretion to reject Minister's application if, notwithstanding misrepresentations, other sufficient evidence for positive determination) and sought to introduce new PIF containing truthful information--Panel refused to accept new PIF--Application allowed--RD did not err in refusing to accept new evidence from applicants, but in taking into account evidence submitted by Minister to reassess credibility of remaining evidence before original RD panel--Under Act, s. 69.3(5), Minister not entitled to adduce new evidence as to why remaining untainted evidence should not be believed and applicant not entitled to adduce new evidence to bootstrap untainted evidence--Submissions must be based solely on what would have been before original panel after excluding anything established under Act, s. 69.2(2) as being affected by fraud, misrepresentation, suppression or concealment--Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, ss. 69.2(2) (as enacted by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 18; S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 61), 69.3(5) (as enacted by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 18; S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 64).