TB9-28604

TB9-28604

Although the RPD permissibly drew adverse inferences for BOC omissions and lack of corroboration in part, it erred in rejecting the Appellant's entire testimony and failed to assess the uncontested aspects of his profile against the objective country evidence; on correct application of the law and country conditions the Appellant has a well-founded fear of persecution (including risk of forced recruitment/imputed political opinion) and is a Convention refugee, so the RAD sets aside the RPD decision and substitutes its own determination under s.111(1)(b) IRPA.

Citation
TB9-28604
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX); Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision Under Irpa) / Decision (reasons and Determination)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside the RPD decision and determines the Appellant is a Convention refugee
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Credibility Assessment, Corroboration and Adverse Inference, Country Conditions, Forced Recruitment, Standard of Review, Imputed Political Opinion
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law International Protection Convention Refugee Determination Credibility Assessment Corroboration and Adverse Inference Country Conditions +3 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)

Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision Under Irpa) / Decision (reasons and Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility assessment
  2. 2 Whether adverse inferences from BOC omissions and failure to corroborate were justified
  3. 3 Whether similarly situated men in Aden face a risk of forced recruitment amounting to persecution

Ratio Decidendi

Although the RPD permissibly drew adverse inferences for BOC omissions and lack of corroboration in part, it erred in rejecting the Appellant's entire testimony and failed to assess the uncontested aspects of his profile against the objective country evidence; on correct application of the law and country conditions the Appellant has a well-founded fear of persecution (including risk of forced recruitment/imputed political opinion) and is a Convention refugee, so the RAD sets aside the RPD decision and substitutes its own determination under s.111(1)(b) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside the RPD decision and determines the Appellant is a Convention refugee

Orders

  • Appeal allowed; pursuant to s.111(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act the RAD sets aside the RPD determination and substitutes its own determination that the Appellant is a Convention refugee.