MB9-14741

MB9-14741

The RPD's implausibility findings did not satisfy the Federal Court's 'clearest of cases' threshold and the late evidence met statutory and jurisprudential criteria for admission; on balance the new and existing evidence do not rebut the presumption of truthfulness and support substituting a finding that the appellant is a Convention refugee because state protection and IFA are unlikely.

Citation
MB9-14741
Parties
Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (convention Refugee Claim) / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division — Decision on New Evidence and Substitution of Finding
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted finding that XXXX XXXX XXXX is a Convention refugee
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, New Evidence Admissibility, Implausibility Standard, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Presumption of Truthfulness
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Findings New Evidence Admissibility Implausibility Standard State Protection Internal Flight Alternative +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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (convention Refugee Claim) / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division — Decision on New Evidence and Substitution of Finding

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) erred in credibility and implausibility findings
  2. 2 Whether the RAD should admit and rely on new evidence filed after the RPD decision
  3. 3 Whether state protection or an internal flight alternative (IFA) is available in India for the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's implausibility findings did not satisfy the Federal Court's 'clearest of cases' threshold and the late evidence met statutory and jurisprudential criteria for admission; on balance the new and existing evidence do not rebut the presumption of truthfulness and support substituting a finding that the appellant is a Convention refugee because state protection and IFA are unlikely.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted finding that XXXX XXXX XXXX is a Convention refugee

Orders

  • New evidence admitted on appeal
  • In‑person hearing directed and conducted on limited issues