Citizenship and Immigration
Exclusion and Removal
Inadmissible Persons
Judicial review of Minister’s delegate’s opinion applicant would not be at substantial risk of torture, risk to life or to cruel and unusual treatment or punishment under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, ss. 96, 97, if returned to Sri Lanka—Once person found to be protected under Act (protected person), including Convention refugee, may only be removed, refouled, to country of origin in exceptional cases—Delegate’s treatment of evidence flawed—Delegate failing to give reasons for accepting dated evidence while rejecting other evidence similarly dated—Also failing to refer to relevant documentary evidence germane to assessment of applicant’s evidence, relevant to question of reception of applicant on return to Sri Lanka—Delegate’s flawed treatment of evidence leading to possibility assessment of risk to applicant on return to Sri Lanka not adequately evaluated—Balancing exercise (risks for applicant upon refoulement versus danger to Canadian public) could not have proceeded properly—Application allowed.
Sittampalam v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (IMM-248-08, 2009 FC 65, Mandamin J., judgment dated January 22, 2009, 30 pp.)