CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Immigration Practice |
Borcsok v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-370-03
2004 FC 445, Russell J.
25/3/04
9 pp.
Interpretation of transitional provision--Judicial review of dismissal of refugee claim by Immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Protection Division--Claim heard by one member of Board pursuant to Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), s. 163--Personal Information Form, Personal Narrative filed on March 15, 2002--IRPA coming into force on June 28, 2002--Application pursuant to Refugee Protection Division Rules, r. 44 to have matter heard under Immigration Act, s. 69.1(7), providing two members required for quorum, denied--IRPA, s. 191 providing every applica-tion pending before coming into force of IRPA, in respect of which substantive evidence adduced, but no decision made, shall be continued under former Act--Only substantive evidence adduced at hearing of September 10, 2002--Aquino v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (1992), 144 N.R. 315 (F.C.A.) and Isufi v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2003), 237 F.T.R. 161 (F.C.), on point--Filing of PIF not constituting evidence adduced in proceeding; evidence only adduced when identified on record and entered as exhibit at hearing--Application dismissed-- Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, ss. 163, 191--Refugee Protection Division Rules, SOR/2002- 228, r. 44--Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 69.1(7) (as enacted by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 18).