2013 FC, 2013 FC 1228

Date: 20131206 Docket: IMM-7637-13 Citation: 2013 FC 1228 Toronto, Ontario, December 6, 2013 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Shore BETWEEN: BONNIE MARILYN FURBERT KHALIL SHEAQWON HAYWARD AKEYLE KALONJI FURBERT TENDAI ALALE FURBERT Applicantsand THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER [1] The Applicants, a mother and her three children are seeking a stay of removal from deportation to Bermuda.

They arechallenging an Enforcement Officer’s decision to refuse to defer the Applicants’ removal on the basis of a pending two monthHumanitarian and Compassionate Considerations application [H&C]. [2] This Court has already dismissed leave of the Applicants’ negative refugee claim on the basis of state protection and thepossibility of obtaining citizenship from the United Kingdom [U.K.]. [3] Upon reading all the materials submitted by both parties and, also, having heard the parties, the Court has considered thematter in its entirety. [4] This Court recognizes the application of the tripartite conjunctive Toth v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration)(1988), (FCA), 86 NR 302 (FCA) decision test criteria and has determined that no serious issue remains to bedetermined; no irreparable harm would ensue for the Applicants if the stay is not issued; nor is there a balance of convenience thatfavours the Applicants. [5] The discretion of the Enforcement Officer is limited.

As no special circumstances in regard to the H&C are in evidence,other than the usual hardships of departure for adults and children, the Enforcement Officer’s margin of manoeuvre in such cases is nonexistent (Baron v Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2009 FCA 81, [2010] 2 FCR 311) [6] The lack of a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment [PRRA] does not necessitate deferral on the basis of constitutionality (Toth vCanada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2012 FC 1051; Sangarapillai v MPSEP (6 January 2013) IMM-13249-12).

[7] Also, subsequent to the coming into force of the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, SC 2010, c 8, subparagraph 112.(2)(b.1) ofthe Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001 c 27, no person subject to removal may apply for a PRRA if removal takes placewithin twelve months of the Refugee Protection Division’s decision that the refugee claim was abandoned; any Charter challenge mustdemonstrate a real risk of mistreatment, none of which was shown (Farhadi v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), (FC), [1998] 3 FC 315, 144 FTR 76 (TD]). [8] The right to an automatic citizenship is, also, not contested by the Applicants in regard to the United Kingdom. [9] No outstanding risks or irreparable harm have been manifested to this Court. [10] Therefore, none of the three conjunctive criteria of the Toth (FCA) decision test have been satisfied by the Applicants. [11] Thus, the motion for a stay of removal is denied.

ORDER THIS COURT ORDERS that the motion for a stay of removal be denied. "Michel M.J. Shore" Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-7637-13 STYLE OF CAUSE: BONNIE MARILYN FURBERT KHALIL SHEAQWON HAYWARD AKEYLE KALONJI FURBERT TENDAI ALALE FURBERT v THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY ANDEMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

PLACE OF HEARING: toronto, ontario DATE OF HEARING: december 6, 2013 REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER: SHORE J. DATED: December 6, 2013 APPEARANCES : Jeremiah A. Eastman For The Applicants John Provart For The RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Jeremiah A. Eastman Barrister and Solicitor Toronto, Ontario For The Applicants William F. Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario For The RESPONDENT