TB9-12398

TB9-12398

The RAD found the RPD erred in concluding the Erfan certificates were fraudulent, admitted credible new evidence of the Appellants' continued involvement in Erfan meetings, concluded on a balance of probabilities that the Appellants are genuine practitioners of Erfan, and that practitioners face a serious possibility of persecution in Iran with no effective state protection or viable IFA, therefore substituting the RPD decision and finding the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
TB9-12398
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (substitute Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside RPD decision and substitutes finding that the Appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Status, Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Religious Persecution, Internal Flight Alternative
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Status Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Religious Persecution Internal Flight Alternative

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (substitute Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA and RAD Rule 29
  2. 2 Genuineness and probative value of religious certificates
  3. 3 Credibility assessment and deference to RPD

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the RPD erred in concluding the Erfan certificates were fraudulent, admitted credible new evidence of the Appellants' continued involvement in Erfan meetings, concluded on a balance of probabilities that the Appellants are genuine practitioners of Erfan, and that practitioners face a serious possibility of persecution in Iran with no effective state protection or viable IFA, therefore substituting the RPD decision and finding the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside RPD decision and substitutes finding that the Appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

  • Pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(b) of the IRPA, the Refugee Appeal Division sets aside the determination of the Refugee Protection Division and substitutes its own determination that the Appellants are Convention refugees.