Charles v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-164-98
Hugessen J.
7/10/98
4 pp.
Judicial review of immigration officer's refusal to recommend exercise of Minister's power under Immigration Act, s. 114(2) to grant humanitarian, compassionate relief to applicant-Immigration officer permitting counsel to sit in during interview of applicant, husband as courtesy, but not to assist clients' with responses-Applicant submitting denial of right to counsel, citing Qi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship & Immigration) (1995), 33 Imm. L.R. (2d) 57 (F.C.T.D.) wherein Reed J. finding denial of right to counsel during adjudicator's hearing on s. 27 report breach of principles of natural justice-Qi distinguishable as no evidence herein of letter to applicants inviting them to bring counsel; nature of hearing in Qi such that counsel having right to be present, whereas nature of hearing herein such that minimal requirements of fairness-Only evidence concerning denial of right to counsel contained in immigration officer's affidavit-Affidavit not indicating counsel denied right to make representations either orally or in writing with regard to client's case, which might have lead to different conclusion-Legitimate restriction on counsel to not permit interference or assistance with client's responses-No denial of natural justice-Question left open as to result if counsel denied right to make representations-Following question certified: on application for humanitarian, compassionate relief, is it denial of duty of fairness for officer to deny counsel right to assist applicant with response?