Hyperlawhypertext legal database Minister of Manpower and Immigration v. Brooks [1974] SCR 850

← Cases

Minister of Manpower and Immigration v. Brooks

[1974] SCR 850 Court SCC Decision date 1973-04-02 English

PartiesMinister of Manpower and Immigration Appellant·Robert Philip Brooks Respondent

Counsel (4)
C.R.O. Munro, Q.C., and S.F. Froomkin, for the appellant.
Joseph Sedgwick, Q.C., A.J. Hewitt, Q.C., and F.J. McDonald, for the respondent.
Solicitor for the appellant: Donald S. Maxwell, Ottawa.
Solicitors for the respondent: Hewitt, Hewitt, Nesbitt, Reid, McDonald & Tierney, Ottawa.

Judges Abbott, Douglas Charles; Martland, Ronald; Judson, Wilfred; Ritchie, Roland Almon; Spence, Wishart Flett; Pigeon, Louis-Philippe; Laskin, Bora

Delivered by Judgment of the Court

On appeal from Canada

Subjects Immigration

Contents

Judgment of the Court

The judgment of the Court was delivered by

Did the Immigration Appeal Board err in law in its interpretaiton of the expression “false document” as used in section 19(1)(e)(viii) of the Immigration Act?

[Page 854]

Did the Immigration Appeal Board err in law in its interpretation of the expression “document pertaining to his admission” as used in section 19(1)(e)(viii) of the Immigration Act?
Did the Immigration Appeal Board err in its interpretation of section 19(1)(e)(viii) of the Immigration Act by deciding that it applies only where the relevant information is intentionally both false and misleading?
Did the Immigration Appeal Board err in law in its interpretation of the question, “Why do you wish to migrate?”
Did the Immigration Appeal Board err in law in deciding that the Respondent could not be deported under section 19(1)(e)(viii) because it had not been proved that he was, at the time of his admission to Canada, in a prohibited class?

Footnotes

  1. [1] 1 I.A.C. 10; 33.
  2. [2] [1971] S.C.R. 888.
  3. [3] [1929], 34 F.(2d) 920.
  4. [4] [1972] S.C.R. 733.

Statutes and regulations cited