Asomadu-Acheampong v. Canada ( Minister of Employment and Immigration )
T-1882-92
Joyal J.
27/9/93
5 pp.
Application to set aside Adjudicator's decision issuing removal order on grounds refusal of request for adjournment denying applicant right to counsel-Although receiving notice of inquiry respecting removal in January 1992, applicant appearing at hearing in March with letter from counsel indicating unavailable that day-No explanation or grounds for request for adjournment-Inquiry flowing from inquiry earlier adjourned when refugee claim made-No discretion in Adjudicator-Applicant arguing surrounding circumstances immaterial when Tribunal, in refusing adjournment proceeds in absence of counsel-Submitting right to counsel absolute, counsel's absence vitiates tribunal's decision and new hearing should be ordered-Application dismissed-Right to counsel no more absolute than right of tribunal to determine own process-If conflict between two rights, for right to counsel to prevail, regard must be had to surrounding circumstances to determine if applicant suffering any prejudice-Right to counsel adjunct to doctrine of natural justice and fairness, to rule audi alteram partem, to rule of full answer and discovery and to similar rules developed to assure rights of any person subject to any inquiry to be determined according to law-Unless breach of any such rule resulting in some prejudice, refusal to adjourn not depriving tribunal of jurisdiction or grounds to quash decision-No prejudice herein-Removal order pro forma where Adjudicator, on basis of report before him bereft of any discretion-Putting applicant at liberty at own recognizance, instead of requiring posting of security, most Adjudicator could do-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 30 (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 9)-Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, being Part I of the Constitution Act, 1982, Schedule B, Canada Act 1982, 1982, c. 11 (U.K.) [R.S.C., 1985, Appendix II, No. 44], s. 10.