MC0-08794

MC0-08794

The RAD found the RPD erred in its credibility and IFA analyses, admitted limited new evidence (Exhibits A-1 and A-2), concluded the appellants were credible and personally targeted by AGC because of the principal appellant's role as a social leader, found state protection in Colombia inadequate and no viable internal flight alternative exists given AGC's national reach, and therefore allowed the appeal and substituted its decision that the appellants are persons in need of protection.

Citation
MC0-08794
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Before Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Allowed; RAD Substituted Decision for RPD Finding Appellants Are Persons in Need of Protection
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD substitutes its own decision finding appellants are persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Admissibility of New Evidence, Oral Hearing Request
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Protection Administrative Law Human Rights Law Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Admissibility of New Evidence +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Before Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Allowed; RAD Substituted Decision for RPD Finding Appellants Are Persons in Need of Protection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its adverse credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether there is a viable internal flight alternative in Colombia
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection is available in Colombia

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the RPD erred in its credibility and IFA analyses, admitted limited new evidence (Exhibits A-1 and A-2), concluded the appellants were credible and personally targeted by AGC because of the principal appellant's role as a social leader, found state protection in Colombia inadequate and no viable internal flight alternative exists given AGC's national reach, and therefore allowed the appeal and substituted its decision that the appellants are persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD substitutes its own decision finding appellants are persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and RPD decision set aside; RAD substitutes decision that appellants are persons in need of protection
  • Admit as new evidence portions of Clarification Letter introducing new evidence (Exhibit A-1) and Letter from Legal Representative of the Foundation (Exhibit A-2); other proffered documents rejected as new evidence