IMM-3066-96
B E T W E E N:
PONNUTHURAI ANTON ARULANANDAM
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
GIBSON, J.:
These reasons arise out of an application for judicial review of a decision of a Post Claim Determination Officer that the Applicant is not a member of the Post Determination Refugee Claimant in Canada Class. The decision of the Officer is dated the 19th of November, 1995.
The Applicant is a citizen of Sri Lanka. The Post Claim Determination Officer, in reasons supporting his decision, described the issue before him in the following terms:
| ... whether or not [the Applicant] is: |
| an immigrant in Canada who if removed to a country [to] which the immigrant could be removed would be subject to an objectively identifiable risk, which risk would apply in every part of that country and would not be faced generally by other individuals in or from that country, |
| (i) to the immigrant's life, other than a risk to the immigrant's life that is caused by the inability of that country to provide adequate health or medical care, |
| (ii) of extreme sanctions against the immigrant, or |
| (iii) of inhumane treatment of the immigrant. |
In deciding the issue against the Applicant, the Post Claim Determination Officer relied on the text of an address made by professor Bruce Matthews to the Immigration and Refugee Board on January 19th, 1995 and on the United States Department of State, Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 1994. While the reliance on this documentary evidence was originally urged to be reliance on extrinsic evidence to which the Applicant was not given an opportunity to reply, counsel before me acknowledged that the material before the Court demonstrated that both of these documents were known to counsel for the Applicant and could have been, or were, addressed in submissions to the Post Claim Determination Officer.
It was argued before me that the Post Claim Determination Officer erred in law in failing to take into account, or even acknowledge, supplementary submissions made on behalf of the Applicant in September of 1995, more than a month before the date of the Officer's decision. The brief answer to this argument is that the September, 1995 representations do not form part of the certified tribunal record that is before the Court. Since those submissions do not form part of the certified record, and since no evidence was adduced on behalf of the Applicant to prove that the September, 1995 submissions were actually received by the Respondent, I must presume that they were not received and therefore no error was made by the Post Claim Determination Officer in failing to consider those submissions. In Vairavanathan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)1 Madame Justice Simpson wrote:
| I should note that the Second Submission was unexpected, and in situations where counsel decide to forward post-hearing submissions which the Board has not requested, I think there is a duty on counsel to obtain a confirmation from the relevant panel members that the submissions have actually been received. |
The facts of this matter illustrate that it is a wise practice to obtain confirmation of receipt of submissions voluntarily made, particularly when those submissions are likely to be unexpected by the officer or tribunal to which they are directed.
In all of the circumstances of this matter, I conclude that the Post Claim Determination Officer made no reviewable error in relying on the documentary evidence that he considered and in failing to consider or even acknowledge the September, 1995 submissions on behalf of the Applicant.
This application for judicial review will be dismissed.
"Frederick E. Gibson"
Judge
Toronto, Ontario
July 15, 1997
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-3066-96
STYLE OF CAUSE: PONNUTHURAI ANTON ARULANANDAM
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
DATE OF HEARING: JULY 15, 1997
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: GIBSON J.
DATED: JULY 15, 1997
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Marie-Claude Rigaud
For the Applicant
Ms. Sadian G. Campbell
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Waldman and Associates
Barristers and Solicitors
281 Eglinton Avenue East,
Toronto, Ontario
M4P 1L3
For the Applicant
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Court No.: IMM-3066-96
Between:
PONNUTHURAI ANTON ARULANANDAM
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP |
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
__________________
1 (1996), 43 Admin. L.R. (2d) 121