TB9-16927

TB9-16927

RAD allowed Principal Appellant's appeal and substituted a finding that she is a Convention refugee because the RPD erred by failing to account for credible medical and psychological evidence of trauma-related memory problems, by misweighing corroborative letters and by conducting insensitive questioning regarding a miscarriage; RAD found no adequate state protection or reasonable internal flight alternative in the Bahamas; RAD dismissed Minor Appellant's appeal because his US citizenship precluded a claim against the United States and thus he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TB9-16927
Parties
Appellant Principal: Principal Appellant (name redacted); Appellant Minor: Minor Appellant (name redacted); Respondent Minister: Minister of Immigration
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division; New Evidence Application Under S.110(4) and S.110(6)
Outcome
Appeal allowed for Principal Appellant; appeal dismissed for Minor Appellant
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, New Evidence Admissibility, Medical and Psychological Evidence, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution, Procedure and Sensitivity in Hearings
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Protection Administrative Law Human Rights Family/domestic Violence Credibility Assessment New Evidence Admissibility Medical and Psychological Evidence +4 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant (name redacted)

Appellant Principal

Minor Appellant (name redacted)

Appellant Minor

Minister of Immigration

Respondent Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division; New Evidence Application Under S.110(4) and S.110(6)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RPD erred in credibility assessment by failing to account for medical evidence of trauma and memory issues
  2. 2 Whether new evidence meets criteria under s.110(4) and whether it justifies a hearing under s.110(6)
  3. 3 Whether corroborative support letters were improperly discounted

Ratio Decidendi

RAD allowed Principal Appellant's appeal and substituted a finding that she is a Convention refugee because the RPD erred by failing to account for credible medical and psychological evidence of trauma-related memory problems, by misweighing corroborative letters and by conducting insensitive questioning regarding a miscarriage; RAD found no adequate state protection or reasonable internal flight alternative in the Bahamas; RAD dismissed Minor Appellant's appeal because his US citizenship precluded a claim against the United States and thus he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed for Principal Appellant; appeal dismissed for Minor Appellant

Orders

  • Pursuant to s.111(1)(b) IRPA set aside RPD determination and substitute RAD determination that Principal Appellant is a Convention refugee
  • Pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA dismiss appeal and confirm RPD determination that Minor Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection