TB5-03602

TB5-03602

Because the audio audit demonstrated inaccurate translation during the RPD hearing and counsel had noted interpretation difficulties at the hearing, the RAD concluded that the RPD's credibility findings could not stand; applying the hybrid appeal standard from Huruglica and exercising authority under s.111(1)(c) IRPA, the RAD allowed the appeal and referred the matter back to the RPD for redetermination by a differently‑constituted panel.

Citation
TB5-03602
Parties
Appellant (principal): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Appeal Heard by Rad; Appeal Allowed and Matter Referred Back to RPD for Redetermination by a Differently‑constituted Panel
Outcome
Appeal allowed; matter referred back to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently‑constituted panel
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Gender‑based Persecution, Interpreter/translation Accuracy, Admissibility of New Evidence, Standard of Review/hybrid Appeal, Referral for Redetermination
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Procedural Fairness Credibility Findings Gender‑based Persecution Interpreter/translation Accuracy Admissibility of New Evidence +2 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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (principal)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Appeal Heard by Rad; Appeal Allowed and Matter Referred Back to RPD for Redetermination by a Differently‑constituted Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in adverse credibility findings based on perceived contradictions and omissions
  2. 2 Whether the RPD improperly drew negative inferences from delay in disclosure of sexual assaults contrary to the Gender Guidelines
  3. 3 Whether inaccuracies in translation at the RPD hearing undermined procedural fairness and the resulting credibility findings

Ratio Decidendi

Because the audio audit demonstrated inaccurate translation during the RPD hearing and counsel had noted interpretation difficulties at the hearing, the RAD concluded that the RPD's credibility findings could not stand; applying the hybrid appeal standard from Huruglica and exercising authority under s.111(1)(c) IRPA, the RAD allowed the appeal and referred the matter back to the RPD for redetermination by a differently‑constituted panel.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; matter referred back to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently‑constituted panel

Orders

  • Appeal allowed under s.111(1)(c) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  • Matter referred back to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently‑constituted panel