TB8-31693

TB8-31693

The RAD allowed the appeal and referred the matter to the RPD for re-determination because the RPD failed to properly assess credibility, wrongly dismissed or ignored corroborative affidavits and evidence without adequate analysis, did not test alleged inconsistencies at hearing, and therefore its decision was wrong in law and could not be substituted by the RAD.

Citation
TB8-31693
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision Appeal Allowed and Matter Referred to RPD for Re Determination
Outcome
Appeal allowed; matter referred to the Refugee Protection Division for re-determination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to IRPA ss.111(1)(c) and 111(2).
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (sogie), Referral for Re Determination Under IRPA S.111, Documentary Evidence and Corroboration, Adverse Inference for Failure to Claim Protection in Transit Country
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Credibility Assessment Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (sogie) Referral for Re Determination Under IRPA S.111 Documentary Evidence and Corroboration +1 more

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision Appeal Allowed and Matter Referred to RPD for Re Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether the RPD improperly dismissed documentary evidence and affidavits
  3. 3 Whether the RPD failed to examine testimony and Basis of Claim statements adequately

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD allowed the appeal and referred the matter to the RPD for re-determination because the RPD failed to properly assess credibility, wrongly dismissed or ignored corroborative affidavits and evidence without adequate analysis, did not test alleged inconsistencies at hearing, and therefore its decision was wrong in law and could not be substituted by the RAD.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; matter referred to the Refugee Protection Division for re-determination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to IRPA ss.111(1)(c) and 111(2).

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Pursuant to section 111(1)(c) and 111(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act the matter is referred to the Refugee Protection Division for re-determination by a differently constituted panel.