Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19980729


Docket: IMM-3125-97

BETWEEN:


MUBARIK AHMAD


Applicant


- and -


THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION


Respondent

     Let the attached certified transcript of my Reasons for Order delivered orally from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario on July 15, 1998, be filed to comply with section 51 of the Federal Court Act.

                                                              Judge

OTTAWA, Ontario

     Court File No. IMM-3125-97

     IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     (TRIAL DIVISION)

B E T W E E N :

     MUBARIK AHMAD

     Applicant

     - and -

     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

     Respondent

_________________________________________________________

     BEFORE THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE TEITELBAUM

_________________________________________________________

HELD AT:      Federal Court of Canada,

     330 University Avenue,

     Toronto, Ontario.

DATE:      July 15, 1998

     ORAL REASONS

APPEARANCES:

Lisa Rosenblatt      for the Applicant

Kevin Lunney      for the Respondent

     THE COURT: Would you like to take this decision, please?

     After the commencement of the hearing into this matter, it became apparent that the Board made a number of serious errors in their decision.

     One of the most serious errors is that the Board confused the issue with regard to what we will call the Blasphemy laws in Pakistan in relation to the laws relating to Ordinance 20.

     I am also satisfied, without having heard the parties, but on the basis of my own preparation for today's hearing, that the Board made a serious error with regard to an incident that allegedly took place on the June 8th or June 9th and the applicant, in his relating of this incident, he stated that the individuals were members of two groups and the Board said, "Well, the newspaper reporting the incident said it was a mob", and they did not give the applicant credibility because of this issue.

     Counsel for the respondent wisely and with the deep appreciation of this Court conceded that this matter should be returned to a new Board for a new hearing.

     I do not feel it even necessary to ask counsel if there are any questions to be certified because of the circumstances of this appeal.

     The appeal is allowed.

 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.