Latest Immigration Decision

Canada (Minister of Citizenship & Immigration) v Guettouche

Decider: Russel W. Zinn J.

Court: Federal Court

Citation: 2011 FC 574

Judgment: May 19, 2011

Docket:  T-1828-10

[15]           The citizenship judge in this case did not explicitly answer the threshold question of whether residence was established by Ms. Guettouche.  I may have been prepared to infer that the first stage of the test had been met from the fact that the judge turned to the Koo test for residency and determined that the respondent had centralized her mode of living in Canada.  However, the judge’s statement that “I believe that during this latter two and a quarter years (approximately) of the relevant period, the applicant began to establish residence in Canada” makes such an inference impossible.  It begs the question: “If she only began to establish residence in the latter two and one-quarter years, when, if ever, did Ms. Guettouche actually establish residency in Canada?”

[16]           In order to apply the Koo factors to examine absences in excess of the statutory minimum, a citizenship judge must make an initial determination that the applicant for citizenship has established residence in Canada.  In this case, I am unable to conclude that such a finding was made and therefore I must allow this appeal.

JUDGMENT

THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the appeal is allowed and the decision of Citizenship Judge May Way is set aside, without costs