Ladio v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-4780-96
Muldoon J.
11/7/97
3 pp.
Citizenship and Immigration-Respondent applying for judicial review of IRB Appeal Division (Tribunal) decision "on consent of parties"-Grounds deficient, in matter of public law-Parties have mistakenly treated matter as if it were private law-Since Minister's role, and Attorney General's role, to uphold and enforce public law, Court, and by extension, public, need to know, and to fix Minister publicly with, cogent reasons for "throwing in towel"-Court and public need to be assured not case of favouritism-Minister and Crown counsel requested to give cogent reason for consent, assuming consent accorded for good, lawful, cogent reason-Court will not accept dry, taciturn and groundless consent to government's lying down on job-Here, Court did Crown's job and went through Tribunal's record-Tribunal somehow forgot or overlooked fact family members came to testify on applicant's behalf-Stated contrary in reasons-Sufficient ground for quashing decision-Why could not Minister's cousel simply have stated as much?-Application allowed.