Cheung ( Re )
T-789-94
McGillis J.
3/8/95
3 pp.
Appeal dismissed on basis appellant failed to satisfy residency requirement in Citizenship Act, s. 5(1)(e)-Rest of decision obiter as amendment to notice of appeal to include new ground refused-Appellant arguing Citizenship Court Judge's decision rendered outside Immigration Act, s. 14(1) 60-day statutory time period null and void-Appellant also arguing s. 17 suspension of processing of application improperly obtained by Citizenship Court and not justifying extension of 60-day time period-Citizenship Court manager indicating to Department of Multiculturalism and Citizenship that s. 17 suspension requested "to give party time to provide requested documentation or to substantiate claim" although neither appellant nor counsel ever making such request-Counsel indicating some Citizenship Court Judges frequently failing to comply with 60day period-Citizenship Court manager acting improperly in seeking, on behalf of Judge, s. 17 suspension-Statutory provisions in Act, ss. 14 and 17 must be respected and adhered to scrupulously-Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, ss. 14 (as am. by S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 8), 17 (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28 s. 7; S.C. 1992, c. 49, s. 10).