Landmark Decision in 1999 - Procedural Fairness

Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 1999 CanLII 699 (SCC)

Baker v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) was a landmark 1999 decision by the Supreme Court of Canada concerning procedural fairness in administrative law and the consideration of children's interests in immigration decisions.

The case involved Mavis Baker, a Jamaican woman who had been in Canada since 1981 and had four Canadian-born children. She was ordered deported in 1992 for working illegally and overstaying her visa. Baker applied for an exemption on humanitarian and compassionate grounds to allow her to stay in Canada, but this was denied.

Facts:

• Mavis Baker was a Jamaican citizen who had been in Canada since 1981 and had four Canadian-born children.
• She was ordered deported in 1992 for working illegally and overstaying her visa.
• She applied for an exemption to allow her to stay in Canada on humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) grounds under s.114(2) of the Immigration Act.
• Her application was denied without reasons provided.
• She sought judicial review of the decision.

Issues:

1. What is the appropriate standard of review for H&C decisions?
2. Were the principles of procedural fairness violated?
3. Was the decision unreasonable in failing to give sufficient weight to the interests of Baker's children?

Holding: The appeal was allowed and the case was sent back for reconsideration by a different immigration officer.

Key Points:

• The appropriate standard of review is reasonableness.
• Procedural fairness requires that reasons be provided for H&C decisions.
• There was a reasonable apprehension of bias based on the immigration officer's notes.
• The best interests of affected children should be a primary consideration in H&C decisions.
• The decision was unreasonable for failing to give sufficient weight to the children's interests.

Reasoning:

• H&C decisions are discretionary but must be made in a manner that is reasonable and consistent with the values underlying the grant of discretion.
• The Convention on the Rights of the Child, though not directly applicable, is relevant in interpreting the scope of discretion under the Immigration Act.
• The immigration officer's notes showed a lack of impartiality and sensitivity to the children's interests.

This case established important principles regarding procedural fairness, the standard of review, and consideration of children's interests in immigration decisions.