Federal Court of Appeal Decisions

Decision Information

Valle Lopes v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration)

Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date 2012-01-24
Neutral citation 2012 FCA 25
File numbers A-236-11

Decision Content

Federal Court of Appeal

 

Cour d'appel fédérale

Date: 20120124

Docket: A-236-11

Citation: 2012 FCA 25

 

CORAM:       EVANS J.A.

                        SHARLOW J.A.

                        LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

JOSE VALLE LOPES

Appellant

and

 

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

 

 

Heard at Toronto, Ontario, on January 24, 2012.

Judgment delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on January 24, 2012.

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY:                                        SHARLOW J.A.

 

Federal Court of Appeal

 

Cour d'appel fédérale

Date: 20120124

Docket: A-236-11

Citation: 2012 FCA 25

 

CORAM:       EVANS J.A.

                        SHARLOW J.A.

                        LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A.

 

BETWEEN:

JOSE VALLE LOPES

Appellant

and

 

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on January 24, 2012)

SHARLOW J.A.

[1]               We have not been persuaded that the judgment of the Federal Court (2010 FC 403), or the decision of the Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board that was under review in the Federal Court, was based on any error of law or any factual finding that was not reasonably open to the Board.

 

[2]               Nor are we persuaded that the record discloses any basis upon which this Court should reverse the finding of the Federal Court that the proceedings before the Board were not fatally flawed by an abuse of process, bad faith, or the incompetence of counsel.

 

[3]               The certified question reads as follows:

Did the Board err in rejecting the defence of duress by applying a purely objective standard of assessment, that being the assessment that because of the multiple deaths that had occurred, the risk to the applicant of his own death was irrelevant to the assessment?

 

[4]               This question is not dispositive because it is based on an incorrect premise. The Board did not use a purely objective standard to assess the defence of duress. Nor is it a serious question of general importance because it is focussed on the particular facts of this case. Accordingly, we decline to answer the question.

 

[5]               The appeal will be dismissed.

 

 

“K. Sharlow”

J.A.

 

 

 

FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL

 

NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

 

 

DOCKET:                                                                             A-236-11

 

(APPEAL FROM A JUDGMENT OF THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE O’KEEFE DATED MAY 20, 2011, DOCKET NO. IMM-240-09).

 

 

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                            JOSE VALLE LOPES v.

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

 

 

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                      Toronto, Ontario

 

 

DATE OF HEARING:                                                        January 24, 2012

 

 

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

OF THE COURT BY:                                                         EVANS, SHARLOW & LAYDEN-STEVENSON JJ.A.

 

DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY:                         SHARLOW.J.A.

 

APPEARANCES:

 

Timothy Wichert

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

Martin Anderson

Susan Bhattacharyya

FOR THE RESPONDENT

 

 

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

 

Jackman and Associates

Barrister & Solicitor

Toronto, Ontario

 

FOR THE APPELLANT

Myles J. Kirvan

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

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.