Federal Court Decisions

Date: 20060531

Docket: IMM-4002-05

Citation: 2006 FC 663

Ottawa, Ontario, May 31, 2006

PRESENT:      The Honourable Mr. Justice Mosley

BETWEEN:

SHAFIQUR RAHMAN CHOWDHURY

Applicant

and

THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA

Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT

[1]                In this application Mr. Shafiqur Rahman Chowdhury seeks judicial review of the decision of a removals officer dated June 10, 2005. In that decision, the officer denied the applicant's request to defer his removal from Canada pursuant to a previously issued removal order.

[2]                The applicant has argued that he cannot be removed from Canada without the completion of a pre-removal risk assessment. This presupposes that the applicant has made such an application.

[3]                The applicant contends that his immigration consultant filed an application for a pre-removal risk assessment in December 2003, but there is no record that such an application was received by Citizenship and Immigration Canada. There is also no evidence filed in support of this application, from a person with actual knowledge, that the pre-removal risk assessment application was in fact submitted.

[4]                As stated by this Court on numerous occasions, a removals officer has only a limited degree of discretion to defer removal: Simoes v. Canada(Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2000), 187 F.T.R. 219, 7 Imm. L.R. (3d) 141 (F.C.T.D.). If there is a valid and enforceable removal order, immediate removal should be the rule and deferral the exception. A deferral decision ought only to be set aside if it was patently unreasonable: Arroyo v. Canada(Minister for Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2006 FC 260.

[5]                In the circumstances it was not patently unreasonable for the removals officer to proceed on the basis that there was no outstanding pre-removal risk assessment. The requested grounds for deferral were considerations of a humanitarian and compassionate nature, and these are not sufficient to warrant deferral: Wright v. Canada(Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2002), 20 Imm. L.R. (3d) 97, 2002 FCT 113 (F.C.T.D.); Boniowski v. Canada(Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2004), 44 Imm. L.R. (3d) 31, 2004 FC 1161.

[6]                No questions of general importance were proposed and none will be certified.

JUDGMENT

IT IS ORDERED that this application for judicial review is dismissed. No question is certified.

"Richard G. Mosley"

FEDERAL COURT

NAME OF COUNSEL ANDSOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                           IMM-4002-05

STYLE OF CAUSE:                           SHAFIQUR RAHMAN CHOWDHURY

                                                            and

                                                            THE SOLICITOR GENERAL OF CANADA

PLACE OF HEARING:                     Ottawa, Ontario

DATE OF HEARING:                       May 23, 2006

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT:        MOSLEY J.

DATED:                                              May 31, 2006

APPEARANCES:

Rezaur Rhaman	FOR THE APPLICANT
Joanna Hill	FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

REZAUR RAHMAN Barrister & Solicitor Ottawa, Ontario	FOR THE APPLICANT
JOHN H. SIMS, Q.C. Deputy Attorney General of Canada Ottawa, Ontario	FOR THE RESPONDENT