TB5-08371

TB5-08371

The RAD found the study permit and letter of acceptance met s.110(4) because the appellants could not reasonably have been expected to present them to the RPD; the documents are credible, relevant and material to a determinative credibility finding (status and threat). Two errors in the RPD's credibility analysis (misreading minutes as not threatening and incorrect finding that associated appellant was out of status) were fatal to the RPD decision. Because significant credibility concerns remain and the RAD is not in a position to substitute findings, the RAD allowed the appeals and referred the matter to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel under s.111(1)(c) IRPA.

Citation
TB5-08371
Parties
Principal Appellant: Principal Appellant (XXXX XXXX); Associated Appellant: Associated Appellant (XXXX XXXX)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Admissibility of New Evidence and Referral to Refugee Protection Division for Redetermination
Outcome
Appeals allowed in part; matter referred to Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA
Legal Topics
Admissibility of New Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Standard of Review and Deference, Section 110(4) IRPA, Referral Under Section 111(1)(c) IRPA, Oral Hearing Under Section 110(6) IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Admissibility of New Evidence Credibility Assessment Standard of Review and Deference Section 110(4) IRPA Referral Under Section 111(1)(c) IRPA +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 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant (XXXX XXXX)

Principal Appellant

Associated Appellant (XXXX XXXX)

Associated Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Admissibility of New Evidence and Referral to Refugee Protection Division for Redetermination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed new evidence meets s.110(4) IRPA requirements
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings regarding threats from tribe
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred in finding associated appellant out of status

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the study permit and letter of acceptance met s.110(4) because the appellants could not reasonably have been expected to present them to the RPD; the documents are credible, relevant and material to a determinative credibility finding (status and threat). Two errors in the RPD's credibility analysis (misreading minutes as not threatening and incorrect finding that associated appellant was out of status) were fatal to the RPD decision. Because significant credibility concerns remain and the RAD is not in a position to substitute findings, the RAD allowed the appeals and referred the matter to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel under s.111(1)(c) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed in part; matter referred to Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA

Orders

  • Admit as new evidence the study permit and letter of acceptance related to the associated Appellant
  • Refer the matters TB5-08371 and TB5-08372 to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA