MB9-23321

MB9-23321

The application to reopen was denied because the Applicant failed to provide credible evidence that the BOCs were received by the Board before the abandonment decision and failed to comply with Rule 62(2); absent proof of a breach of natural justice the RPD had no jurisdiction to reopen the claim.

Citation
MB9-23321
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Immigration)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Application to Reopen After Abandonment Decision
Outcome
Application to reopen denied
Legal Topics
Reopening of Claim, Abandonment, Natural Justice, RPD Rule 62(2)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Procedural Fairness Reopening of Claim Abandonment Natural Justice RPD Rule 62(2)

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Immigration)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Application to Reopen After Abandonment Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD had jurisdiction to reopen the abandoned refugee claim
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of natural justice justifying reopening
  3. 3 Whether the Applicant complied with RPD Rule 62(2) regarding forwarding the application to the Minister

Ratio Decidendi

The application to reopen was denied because the Applicant failed to provide credible evidence that the BOCs were received by the Board before the abandonment decision and failed to comply with Rule 62(2); absent proof of a breach of natural justice the RPD had no jurisdiction to reopen the claim.

Court Disposition

Application to reopen denied

Orders

  • Application to reopen the refugee claim is denied