Arlene Rimer

The applicant, a citizen of Colombia, sought judicial review of a decision refusing his Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) application.

The applicant claimed he feared for his life from a paramilitary group due to his father's unpaid extortion debt.

The Officer determined the applicant had not rebutted the presumption of state protection available in Colombia.

On judicial review, the applicant argued the Officer breached natural justice by not holding a hearing and making a veiled credibility finding, and that the decision was unreasonable.

The Federal Court held the Officer made a finding on the sufficiency of evidence rather than credibility, meaning no hearing was required.

The Court also found the decision reasonable as the applicant failed to provide clear and convincing evidence to rebut the presumption of state protection.

The application for judicial review was dismissed.

The applicant sought a stay of his deportation to Colombia pending his application for leave and judicial review of a decision rejecting his pre-removal risk assessment (PRRA).

The Federal Court found that the applicant did not come to the Court with "clean hands" because his affidavit in support of the motion was misleading.

Specifically, he failed to disclose his history of entering Canada with a fraudulent passport and the details of his criminal history, and gave an incredible explanation for his guilty plea to a robbery charge.

The Court concluded that the serious omissions in his affidavit undermined the integrity of the proceeding, disentitling him to the equitable relief of a stay.

The motion for a stay was dismissed.