VB9-00160

VB9-00160

The RAD set aside the RPD decision and remitted the matter because the RPD materially erred in its credibility assessment by failing to put material contradictions to the claimant and failing to state which of multiple explanations it accepted; those errors warranted referral under s.111(1)(c) IRPA; no new hearing was ordered because no new evidence was disclosed under s.110(4).

Citation
VB9-00160
Parties
Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal / Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minister): Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division; Remitted to RPD for Re Determination
Outcome
RAD sets aside the RPD determination and refers the matter back to the RPD for re-determination by a different Panel under s.111(1)(c) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Remand, Procedural Fairness, New Evidence (s.110(4)), Statutory Appeal Under S.111(1)(c)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Remand Procedural Fairness New Evidence (s.110(4)) Statutory Appeal Under S.111(1)(c)

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal / Claimant

Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Appellant (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division; Remitted to RPD for Re Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD properly assessed the claimant's credibility and explained which explanations it accepted
  2. 2 Whether the RPD failed to put material contradictions and discrepancies to the claimant at the hearing
  3. 3 Whether the RAD may order an oral hearing absent new evidence under s.110(4) of the IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD set aside the RPD decision and remitted the matter because the RPD materially erred in its credibility assessment by failing to put material contradictions to the claimant and failing to state which of multiple explanations it accepted; those errors warranted referral under s.111(1)(c) IRPA; no new hearing was ordered because no new evidence was disclosed under s.110(4).

Court Disposition

RAD sets aside the RPD determination and refers the matter back to the RPD for re-determination by a different Panel under s.111(1)(c) IRPA.

Orders

  • Set aside the RPD determination
  • Refer the matter back to the RPD for re-determination by a different Panel