MB5-00623

MB5-00623

The RAD admitted the expert translation report as new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA (A-1) and found over 80 documented 'adjustments' indicating cumulative, material interpretation errors at the RPD hearing which could have affected testimony and credibility; appellants did not waive their rights; therefore the RPD determination was set aside and the matter referred to a differently constituted RPD for re-determination.

Citation
MB5-00623
Parties
Male Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Female Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Child: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal; RAD Sets Aside RPD Determination and Refers Matter to RPD for Re Determination
Outcome
Appeals allowed; RPD determination dated January 15, 2015 set aside; matter referred to a differently constituted RPD for re-determination.
Legal Topics
Interpreter Error and Translation Quality, Admissibility of New Evidence Under S.110(4) IRPA, Standard of Review for RAD, Referral to RPD for Re Determination, Credibility Findings
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Administrative Law Refugee Law Evidence Law Procedural Fairness Interpreter Error and Translation Quality Admissibility of New Evidence Under S.110(4) IRPA Standard of Review for RAD +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 4 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Male Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Female Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal; RAD Sets Aside RPD Determination and Refers Matter to RPD for Re Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether interpretation errors at the RPD hearing breached procedural fairness
  2. 2 Whether the expert translation report is admissible as new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether appellants waived their right to challenge interpretation

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD admitted the expert translation report as new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA (A-1) and found over 80 documented 'adjustments' indicating cumulative, material interpretation errors at the RPD hearing which could have affected testimony and credibility; appellants did not waive their rights; therefore the RPD determination was set aside and the matter referred to a differently constituted RPD for re-determination.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; RPD determination dated January 15, 2015 set aside; matter referred to a differently constituted RPD for re-determination.

Orders

  • RPD determination dated January 15, 2015 is set aside.
  • The matter is referred to a differently constituted Refugee Protection Division panel for re-determination with directions as appropriate.