TC0-08561

TC0-08561

The RAD allowed the appeals, holding that the RPD erred in making unsupported plausibility/credibility findings and in denying procedural fairness to the Associate Appellant; on the balance of probabilities the Principal Appellant is a journalist targeted for his critical reporting, the Associate and Minor Appellants face a serious possibility of persecution by virtue of association, limited new evidence was admitted, and the RAD substituted its own decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
TC0-08561
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (spouse): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (son): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Procedural Fairness, New Evidence Admissibility, Persecution, Statelessness, State Protection, Sur Place Claim
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Credibility Findings Procedural Fairness New Evidence Admissibility Persecution +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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (son)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellate tribunal should admit new evidence
  2. 2 Whether RPD erred in credibility/plausibility findings regarding the Principal Appellant
  3. 3 Whether the Associate Appellant was denied procedural fairness

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD allowed the appeals, holding that the RPD erred in making unsupported plausibility/credibility findings and in denying procedural fairness to the Associate Appellant; on the balance of probabilities the Principal Appellant is a journalist targeted for his critical reporting, the Associate and Minor Appellants face a serious possibility of persecution by virtue of association, limited new evidence was admitted, and the RAD substituted its own decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and decision substituted: Appellants are Convention refugees
  • Admit as new evidence the letter from the Appellants' Jordanian lawyer and paragraphs 1–16 and 35–39 of the Principal Appellant's affidavit