Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content


Date: 19981221


Docket: T-1341-97


IN THE MATTER OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT,

R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29


AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the

decision of a Citizenship Judge


AND IN THE MATTER OF


THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION,


Appellant,


- and -


KAM CHUEN FUNG,

     Respondent.

     REASONS FOR ORDER

WETSTON, J.

[1]      This is a ministerial appeal from the decision of a Citizenship Judge wherein the judge approved the application of Mr. Fung for citizenship under subsection 5(1) of the Citizenship Act. The Citizenship Judge based his decision on the following: "despite a residence shortage of 708 days, the applicant through credible declaration of intent and the provision of irrefutable indicia has, within the Thurlow framework, given proof of both the establishment and maintenance of a Canadian centrality of mode of living".

[2]      The Minister appeals on the ground that during the four years preceding the date of application for citizenship, the respondent did not accumulate three years of residence in Canada as required by paragraph 5(1)(c) of the Citizenship Act. The main reason Mr. Fung spent less time in Canada was because he had considerable difficulty in letting go of his business in Hong Kong which he had founded with his brother. Later, his brother bought his shares in his business. In Canada, he was involved to a certain extent in a company owned jointly with his brother which involved exporting speaker systems to Hong Kong. He testified that he received no income from this business.

[3]      Mr. Fung was away at least 957 days, or possibly 1073 days, in the previous four year period. The Crown referred the Court to the decision of Reed J. in Re: Koo (1993) 1 F.C. 286 (F.C.T.D.). In reviewing the six factors outlined by Reed J., there is little doubt that Mr. Fung moved to Canada with his family but with respect to the other factors, I am not satisfied that Mr. Fung has sufficiently established that Canada is the place where he regularly, normally or customarily lives. I am satisfied that he was not physically present in Canada for very long prior to the application for citizenship. While his family is resident in Canada, I am satisfied that his pattern of physical presence in Canada is equally consistent with visiting Canada as it is with returning home.

[4]      In his evidence, Mr. Fung indicated that he had enormous difficulty letting go of his business in Hong Kong and that he also maintained a considerable fondness for that city. There is little doubt that the extent of his absences was at least 957 days or possibly 1073 during the relevant period. Moreover, I do not consider that the physical absences during that period were temporary. The evidence suggests that Mr. Fung simply did not want to give up what he had in Hong Kong.

[5]      I am also satisfied that the quality of Mr. Fung's connection with Canada is less substantial than that which existed with Hong Kong. While he did enjoy music with friends during his time spent in Canada, the evidence was insufficient to satisfy me that during the relevant period Mr. Fung integrated himself into Canadian society.

[6]      Accordingly, the appeal shall be allowed.

"Howard I. Wetston"

Judge

Toronto, Ontario

December 21, 1998

     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record

COURT NO:                  T-1341-97

STYLE OF CAUSE:              IN THE MATTER OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29
                     AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the decision of a Citizenship Judge
                     AND IN THE MATTER OF
                     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION,

     Appellant,

                     - and -
                     KAM CHUEN FUNG

     Respondent.

DATE OF HEARING:          TUESDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1998

PLACE OF HEARING:          TORONTO, ONTARIO

REASONS FOR ORDER BY:      WETSTON J.

DATED:                  MONDAY, DECEMBER 21, 1998

APPEARANCES:              Ms. Claire le Riche

                                 For the Appellant
                     Mr. Kam Chuen Fung
                                 For the Respondent

                     Mr. Peter K. Large

                                 Amicus Curiae

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:     

                     Morris Rosenberg

                     Deputy Attorney General of Canada

                                 For the Appellant

                     Kam Chuen Fung

                     21 Bradgate Drive,

                     Thornhill, Ontario
                     L3T 6V3
                    
                                 For the Respondent in Person
                     Peter K. Large

                     610-372 Bay Street

                     Toronto, Ontario

                     M5H 2W9

                                 Amicus Curiae

                     FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA

     Date: 19981221

                         Docket: T-1341-97

                     Between:
                     IN THE MATTER OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29
                     AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the decision of a Citizenship Judge
                     AND IN THE MATTER OF
                     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION,

     Appellant,

                     - and -
                     KAM CHUEN FUNG

     Respondent.

                    

                             REASONS FOR ORDER

                    

 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.