Monmi Goswami

The Attorney General of Canada appealed two decisions granting habeas corpus relief to an individual detained on account of an outstanding deportation order.

The applicant had been detained for approximately 25 months on immigration grounds.

The Court of Appeal upheld the application judge's decision to release the applicant on habeas corpus, finding that the detention was lengthy and of uncertain duration and could no longer be justified as furthering the machinery of immigration control.

However, the Court found that the application judge erred by assuming jurisdiction to supervise any subsequent re-incarceration by immigration authorities.

The Court struck the problematic supervisory clause and provided guidance on appropriate conditions for release in immigration detention cases.

The plaintiff, a self-represented litigant, initiated a civil claim alleging trespass, unlawful seizure of his vehicle and its contents, and infringements of his Charter rights.

The Attorney General of Canada and Canada Border Services Agency officers, as moving parties, brought a Rule 21 motion to dismiss and strike various aspects of the plaintiff's claim.

The court dismissed claims related to vehicle loss, trespass to property, and Section 8 Charter rights due to the plaintiff's lack of legal standing, finding no ownership or possessory interest in the vehicle or properties.

Claims under Sections 7, 9, and 15 of the Charter were struck without leave to amend for failing to disclose a reasonable cause of action and lacking a sufficient factual basis.

However, claims for the loss of personal and business inventory found within the seized vehicle were struck with leave to amend, allowing the plaintiff to address pleading deficiencies.