Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Leandro v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)

Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions
Date 2011-07-06
Neutral citation 2011 FC 828
File numbers IMM-5317-10

Decision Content

 

Federal Court

 

Cour fédérale

 

Date: 20110706

Docket: IMM-5317-10

Citation: 2011 FC 828

Ottawa, Ontario, July 6, 2011

PRESENT:     The Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan

 

 

BETWEEN:

 

JOSE MANUEL LEANDRO

 

 

 

Applicant

 

and

 

 

 

THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

 

 

 

Respondent

 

 

 

 

 

           REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT

 

I.          BACKGROUND

[1]               The Applicant is a citizen of Portugal. He has been in Canada for 45 years. He is addicted to alcohol and crack cocaine and had 31 criminal convictions between September 1977 and May 2010. He added a further conviction on January 4, 2011 while this judicial review was awaiting a hearing.

 

[2]               On April 23, 2009, the Applicant was ordered deported from Canada because of his then latest conviction.

 

[3]               The Applicant appealed the removal order to the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD), which appeal was denied.

 

[4]               The IAD examined the six Ribic factors, noted that it had a wide discretion and that the Ribic factors were not exhaustive.

 

[5]               While the IAD recognized that the Applicant had family support and that he would experience hardship upon return to Portugal, it concluded that any positive factors were outweighed by a low possibility of rehabilitation, lack of establishment and absence of family dependence on him.

 

II.         ANALYSIS

[6]               The standard of review is well established as that of reasonableness (Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v Khosa, 2009 SCC 12).

 

[7]               The Applicant is essentially asking this Court to re-weigh the evidence, and assess the Ribic factors to reach a different conclusion.

 

[8]               The IAD’s reasons were clear and logical. The IAD considered all the relevant factors. There is nothing unreasonable in the weighing of the relevant factors.

 

III.       CONCLUSION

[9]               It is not the Court’s function to substitute its assessment of the evidence. There is no error and this judicial review will be dismissed. There is no question for certification.

 

 

JUDGMENT

THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review is dismissed.

 

 

 

“Michael L. Phelan”

Judge

FEDERAL COURT

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

 

DOCKET:                                          IMM-5317-10

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                          JOSE MANUEL LEANDRO

 

                                                            and

 

                                                            THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

 

 

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                    Toronto, Ontario

 

DATE OF HEARING:                      April 5, 2011

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

AND JUDGMENT:                          Phelan J.

 

DATED:                                             July 6, 2011

 

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Mr. Patrick Roche

 

FOR THE APPLICANT

 

Mr. Brad Gotkin

 

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

REFUGEE LAW OFFICE

Toronto, Ontario

 

FOR THE APPLICANT

 

MR. MYLES J. KIRVAN

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Toronto, Ontario

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

 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.