TB9-18031

TB9-18031

The appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel because the RPD erred in assessing exit and subjective fear but the upheld inconsistency on the date of the relationship and insufficient questioning on core issues prevent the RAD from substituting a positive decision.

Citation
TB9-18031
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal; Remitted to RPD for Redetermination by a Differently Constituted Panel
Outcome
Appeal allowed; matter remitted to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Exit Plausibility, Subjective Fear, Remand for Redetermination, Documentary Evidence, SOGIE Guideline Application
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Lgbtq/sogie Credibility Assessment Exit Plausibility Subjective Fear Remand for Redetermination +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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal; Remitted to RPD for Redetermination by a Differently Constituted Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the Appellant's ability to exit Iran and plausibility of leaving on his passport
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the Appellant's subjective fear of persecution as a gay man
  3. 3 Whether the inconsistency in dates in the Basis of Claim undermines credibility of the alleged same-sex relationship

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel because the RPD erred in assessing exit and subjective fear but the upheld inconsistency on the date of the relationship and insufficient questioning on core issues prevent the RAD from substituting a positive decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; matter remitted to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel.

Orders

  • Allow the appeal.
  • Return the matter to the Refugee Protection Division to be redetermined by a differently constituted panel.