MC0-01917

MC0-01917

The RAD allowed the appeal and substituted a decision that the Appellant is a Convention refugee because the RPD's adverse credibility inferences (based on omissions in the BOC, reliance on CBSA port of entry notes, and other perceived contradictions) were unsustainable; on independent assessment the Appellant credibly established his Tamil ethnicity, past mistreatment by state agents and a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of ethnicity and imputed political opinion; state protection is unavailable and there is no viable internal flight alternative.

Citation
MC0-01917
Parties
Appellant (person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal): XXXX XXXX; Respondent (minister): Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship (respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal — RAD Substituted Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD substituted decision that Appellant is a Convention refugee
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Status, Persecution, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Port of Entry Notes
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Status Persecution State Protection Internal Flight Alternative +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal)

Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship (respondent)

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal — RAD Substituted Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD's adverse credibility findings were sustainable
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant established a risk under sections 96 or 97 of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant's Tamil ethnicity and imputed political opinion attract Convention protection

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD allowed the appeal and substituted a decision that the Appellant is a Convention refugee because the RPD's adverse credibility inferences (based on omissions in the BOC, reliance on CBSA port of entry notes, and other perceived contradictions) were unsustainable; on independent assessment the Appellant credibly established his Tamil ethnicity, past mistreatment by state agents and a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of ethnicity and imputed political opinion; state protection is unavailable and there is no viable internal flight alternative.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD substituted decision that Appellant is a Convention refugee

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and decision of the Refugee Protection Division set aside; RAD substitutes its decision that the Appellant is a Convention refugee