Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

    

     T-2764-96

Between:

     IN THE MATTER OF the Citizenship Act,

     R.S.C. 1985, c. C-29

     AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the

     decision of a Citizenship Judge

     AND IN THE MATTER OF

     WOON TING CHAN,

     Appellant.

    

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

    

ROTHSTEIN, J.:

    

     The appellant arrived in Canada on August 10, 1992 and during the relevant period prior to his Citizenship application was out of Canada 853 days. The reasons given were the winding up of his business, holidays and researching for a business. Also he was ill on one occasion. The appellant incorporated a Canadian company called Atex Textile Ltd. in 1994. The company acts as a sales agent and earned commissions in 1996 of about $9,000 on the sale of some furs from Canada to Hong Kong or China. Other than that, the company has not done any Canadian business.

     The appellant sold 65% of his Hong Kong business but retains ownership of 35%. He is no longer involved in the internal administration of the business but he is involved in sales. The Canadian company Atex Textile Ltd. appears to act as sales agent for the Hong Kong company and Mr. Chan is an employee of the Canadian company.

     There are a number of difficulties with this appeal, regrettably all relating to credibility. Mr. Chan, in cross-examination, said that he kept up with Canadian news by reading Canadian magazines but was unable to name any Canadian magazine.

     In terms of his absences from Canada, three absences are attributed to holidays. To explain why this is a credibility issue I list the following:

-      in Canada, 19 days;
-      out of Canada due to holiday, 49 days;
-      in Canada, 23 days;
-      out of Canada for research for business, 83 days;
-      in Canada, 16 days;
-      out of Canada, holiday, 32 days;
-      in Canada, 15 days;
-      out of Canada, holiday and illness, 158 days.

     The appellant indicated that he took these holidays by himself, that his children were in school in Canada and that his wife was required to stay in Canada to look after the children. It is difficult to understand how an individual who had centralized his mode of living in Canada could take holidays by himself outside of Canada, each for a much longer period of time than the intervals that he spent in Canada.

     Finally, with respect to his income tax returns, it appears that the income of the company that acts as sales agent for the Hong Kong company has minimal revenue. For the year ended October 31, 1996, the revenue was $18,000. Nonetheless, the appellant has mortgage and tax payments of at least $19,000 a year, maintains three cars in Canada and obviously has ordinary living expenses for his wife and children. He indicates that his wife does not work. When questioned, he indicated that the revenue for the payment of these expenses came from the Hong Kong company but there is nothing indicated in the material before me how revenues received in Canada come from that company except for very modest amounts. I therefore have difficulty with the appellant's explanation regarding the declaration of income and the payment of income taxes.

     In the circumstances I do not find the appellant a credible witness and he has not satisfied me that he has centralized his mode of living in Canada notwithstanding his numerous absences. The appeal is dismissed.

"Marshall E. Rothstein"

Judge

Toronto, Ontario

September 3, 1997

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

COURT NO:                  T-2764-96         

STYLE OF CAUSE:          IN THE MATTER OF the Citizenship Act,

                     R.S.C. 1985, c. C-29

                     AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal

                     from the decision of a Citizenship Judge

                     AND IN THE MATTER OF

                     WOON TING CHAN,

                                     Appellant.

                    

DATE OF HEARING:          SEPTEMBER 2, 1997

PLACE OF HEARING:          TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR

JUDGMENT BY:              ROTHSTEIN, J.

DATED:                  SEPTEMBER 3, 1997

APPEARANCES:

                     Mr. Stephen Green

                         For the Appellant

                     Mr. Peter K. Large

                         Amicus Curiae

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

                     GREEN AND SPIEGEL

                     121 King Street West

                     Suite 2200, P.O. Box 114

                     Toronto, Ontario

                     M5H 3T9

                         For the Appellant

                      Mr. Peter K. Large

                     Barrister and Solicitor

                     Suite 610

                     372 Bay Street

                     Toronto, Ontario

                     M5H 2W9

                         Amicus Curiae

                     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

                     Court No.: T-2764-96

                     Between:

                     IN THE MATTER OF the Citizenship Act,

                     R.S.C. 1985, c. C-29

                     AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal

                     from the decision of a Citizenship Judge

                     AND IN THE MATTER OF

                     WOON TING CHAN,

                                     Appellant.

                    

                     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT


 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.