TC0-02088

TC0-02088

RAD found the RPD erred in drawing multiple negative credibility and identity inferences; on independent review the appellants' birth certificates and corroborative letters were reliable, central testimony was consistent and plausible, and country documentation showed risk from government persecution; accordingly the RAD set aside the RPD decision and substituted a finding that the appellants are Convention refugees under IRPA s.111(1)(b).

Citation
TC0-02088
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal: Micheal Crane; Counsel for the Minister: N/A; Panel/tribunal Member: Joel Bousfield
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Substitution of Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside; appellants found to be Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Credibility Assessment, Identity Documents, Country Conditions, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Credibility Assessment Identity Documents Country Conditions Standard of Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Micheal Crane

Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

Joel Bousfield

Panel/tribunal Member

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Substitution of Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether the appellants' identity and Ethiopian citizenship were established
  3. 3 Whether documentary evidence (birth certificates, NIC) was reliable

Ratio Decidendi

RAD found the RPD erred in drawing multiple negative credibility and identity inferences; on independent review the appellants' birth certificates and corroborative letters were reliable, central testimony was consistent and plausible, and country documentation showed risk from government persecution; accordingly the RAD set aside the RPD decision and substituted a finding that the appellants are Convention refugees under IRPA s.111(1)(b).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside; appellants found to be Convention refugees.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and RPD decision dated January 7, 2020 set aside.
  • Substituted decision: appellants are Convention refugees pursuant to section 111(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.