CITIZENSHIP — Appeal
Judgement for this Case: Click here!
Residence — Evidence — Foreign national was citizen of United States who married Canadian citizen and became Canadian permanent resident in 1989 — Foreign national had established chiropractic clinic in United States in 1996, and family moved there however family returned to Canada in 2005 and foreign national intended to sell clinic — Foreign national commuted to clinic part-time to keep business operating while seeking buyer — Foreign national applied for citizenship February 4, 2012 — In response to request from CIC for more details of absences foreign national filed ICES Traveller History report from Border Services Agency which showed her recorded border crossings from August 1, 2000 to April 15, 2013, however not all land border crossings were recorded in report, which was not consistent with foreign national’s estimates — Citizenship judge concluded that foreign national had established requisite physical presence during relevant period and granted citizenship — Minister appealed — Appeal dismissed — Although evidence tendered by foreign national was not perfect, she made reasonable effort to meet burden of establishing number of days of residence — ICES report, which was supposed to record her history of entries into Canada, was incomplete for reasons beyond her control — Since border authorities could not provide foreign national with dependable record, all she could do was offer her own estimates — Foreign national offered three estimates of her absences, in good faith, at various stages of citizenship proceedings — Upon considering ICES report and foreign national’s explanations, which he deemed credible, citizenship judge adjusted incomplete ICES entries for 2008 to account for 36 work weeks — Citizenship judge came up with 346 absences, for physical presence of 1,146 days — Citizenship judge observed that ICES report showed nearly as many early entries as late entries, so that these cancelled each other out and rendered reasonable foreign national’s estimate of 2 absences for every 7 days — It was open to citizenship judge to reach this conclusion — Citizen judge’s subsequent speculation on days of physical presence, applying different calculations, did not override reasonable finding that foreign national met residence requirement — Citizenship judge’s use of words “probably” and “likely” did not negate firm conclusion on physical presence — Mandate of citizenship judge is to assess residence on balance of probabilities — Law has never required certainty — Finding that it was more likely than not that person has met residence requirement justified grant of citizenship