TB8-22576

TB8-22576

The RAD admitted no new evidence, found the RPD did not breach natural justice, accepted that the Principal Appellant and her minor daughter had no viable IFA and no effective state protection and therefore substituted decisions granting refugee/protection status for them, but confirmed the RPD's finding that the Adult Associate Appellant had a viable IFA in Manila or Cebu and dismissed her appeal.

Citation
TB8-22576
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Adult Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part: Principal Appellant and Minor Associate Appellant allowed; Adult Associate Appellant appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Assessment, Gender Based Persecution, Domestic Violence, Admissibility of New Evidence, Natural Justice
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Assessment Gender Based Persecution Domestic Violence +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 7 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Adult Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed new evidence is admissible on appeal under IRPA
  2. 2 Whether an oral hearing is required under subsection 110(6) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings concerning allegations of domestic and sexual violence

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD admitted no new evidence, found the RPD did not breach natural justice, accepted that the Principal Appellant and her minor daughter had no viable IFA and no effective state protection and therefore substituted decisions granting refugee/protection status for them, but confirmed the RPD's finding that the Adult Associate Appellant had a viable IFA in Manila or Cebu and dismissed her appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part: Principal Appellant and Minor Associate Appellant allowed; Adult Associate Appellant appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Substitute decision: Principal Appellant and Minor Associate Appellant are Convention refugees/persons in need of protection
  • RPD decision confirmed and appeal dismissed for Adult Associate Appellant