In re Ralph P. Goldston (Appellant)
Citizenship Appeal Court, Collier J.—Hamilton,
April 11, 1972.
Citizenship—Residence, meaning—Applicant not physi
cally present for required time—Canadian Citizenship Act,
R.S.C. 1970, c. C-19, s. 10(1)(b).
An applicant for citizenship claimed to have resided in
Canada for at least 12 months between December 18, 1969,
and June 18, 1971, but was only physically in, Canada two
to three months of that period.
Held, his application must be refused.
Blaha v. Minister of Citizenship & Immigration [1971]
F.C. 521.
APPEAL from Citizenship Court.
D. Cooper, Q.C. for appellant.
Joseph C. Scime, amicus curiae.
COLLIER J.—I am prepared to give judgment
now.
In this case, the appellant's application for
Canadian citizenship was refused by the Citi
zenship Court on the grounds the appellant had
not satisfied the Court that he had qualified
within section 10(1)(b) of the Canadian Citizen
ship Act, R.S.C. 1952, c. 33, as amended.
The appellant's application was made on June
18, 1971, and as I read the section I have
referred to, he must have resided in Canada for
at least twelve months during the period
December 18, 1969, to June 18, 1971.
On the evidence before the Court, and indeed
before the Court below, he was only physically
in Canada for approximately two to three
months of that period. I cannot distinguish this
case from the decision of Mr. Justice Pratte of
this Court, that is the Citizenship Court of
Appeal, in the case of In re Blaha [[19711 F.C.
521] handed down December 9, 1971. The facts
in the Blaha case are very similar to the facts
here, and I am unable to distinguish the Blaha
case from this one.
In those circumstances, I must, I feel, follow
the Blaha decision in the interests of certainty
and uniformity, but I add this: I agree with the
interpretation given by Mr. Justice Pratte to the
word "residence" as used in section 10(1)(b).
On the facts here, the appellant has not met the
requirements within the meaning given to the
word "residence" by Mr. Justice Pratte.
Mr. Goldston, I am sorry, but I must there
fore dismiss your appeal, although I regretfully
do so, because you seem otherwise to qualify
under the Canadian Citizenship Act.
Thank you, Mr. Cooper, for your submis
sions, and thank you Mr. Scime for your assist
ance as amicus curiae.
The appeal is therefore dismissed.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.