Merino v. Canada ( Secretary of State )
IMM-4409-93
Denault J.
3/8/94
5 pp.
Application for judicial review of decision by Convention Refugee Determination Division (CRDD) applicant not Convention refugee-Applicant citizen of Ecuador claiming Convention refugee status on basis of membership in particular social group and political opinion-Board finding applicant lacking in credibility-Whether finding tainted by reliance on alleged privileged information-Translation of applicant's statement entered into evidence-Counsel for applicant alleging CRDD wrong in allowing statement into evidence and in allowing Refugee Hearing Officer to examine applicant on it-Respondent arguing Immigration Act, s. 68(3) suspended application of principle of solicitor-client privilege in context of refugee hearings-Solicitor-client privilege protected, notwithstanding s. 68(3), on basis of Supreme Court's statement in Solosky v. Canada, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 821 solicitor-client privilege may be considered "fundamental civil and legal right"-Communication at issue not protected by privilege-Not meeting first condition of Wigmore's four fundamental principles-Applicant not preparing document with belief it would remain confidential, but on understanding it would be translated and provided to immigration officials-Board's finding of lack of credibility unassailable-Application dismissed-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 68(3) (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 18).