TC0-11465

TC0-11465

Although the material BOC amendment justified an adverse credibility inference, the RPD erred by failing to assess the totality of the record, notably by not canvassing material discrepancies in the Principal Appellant's own wrongful termination lawsuit and by misapprehending a factual matter (Indigenous identity); because the documentary inconsistencies were not addressed and the amendment alone did not fatally undermine the claim, the appropriate remedy is to remit the matter to the RPD for redetermination after proper consideration of corroboration and credibility issues; the proposed newspaper article was inadmissible as irrelevant under s.110(4)/Singh.

Citation
TC0-11465
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (spouse): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellants (children): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under Irpa) / Decision on Appeal; Matter Remitted to Refugee Protection Division for Redetermination
Outcome
Appeal allowed; matter remitted to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Material Amendment to Basis of Claim (boc), Misapprehension of Facts, Corroboration, Remand to Tribunal, Trauma and Medical Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Material Amendment to Basis of Claim (boc) Misapprehension of Facts +3 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellants (children)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under Irpa) / Decision on Appeal; Matter Remitted to Refugee Protection Division for Redetermination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed new evidence met admissibility under s.110(4) IRPA and Singh (new, credible, relevant)
  2. 2 Whether a material amendment to the BOC justified rejecting the entire claim
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred by failing to consider corroborating documents (wrongful termination lawsuit)

Ratio Decidendi

Although the material BOC amendment justified an adverse credibility inference, the RPD erred by failing to assess the totality of the record, notably by not canvassing material discrepancies in the Principal Appellant's own wrongful termination lawsuit and by misapprehending a factual matter (Indigenous identity); because the documentary inconsistencies were not addressed and the amendment alone did not fatally undermine the claim, the appropriate remedy is to remit the matter to the RPD for redetermination after proper consideration of corroboration and credibility issues; the proposed newspaper article was inadmissible as irrelevant under s.110(4)/Singh.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; matter remitted to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Matter remitted to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination of the Appellants' claims