VB9-02301

VB9-02301

The RAD concluded the RPD erred by rejecting identity based solely on a year of birth discrepancy without considering the totality of documentary and oral evidence showing a plausible administrative error; the RAD further concluded the RPD improperly imported adverse credibility findings into the sur place analysis and overlooked objective country evidence showing Djibouti monitors dissent and social media, such that the claimant established a serious possibility of persecution on return; accordingly the RAD set aside the RPD decision and substituted a determination that the claimant is a Convention refugee under ss.111(1)(b) IRPA.

Citation
VB9-02301
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (convention Refugee Claim) / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Substitution of RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted: Appellant declared a Convention refugee
Legal Topics
Identity Verification, Credibility Assessment, Sur Place (ex Post Facto) Refugee Status, Admissibility of New Evidence Under S.110(4) IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Identity Verification Credibility Assessment Sur Place (ex Post Facto) Refugee Status Admissibility of New Evidence Under S.110(4) IRPA

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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (convention Refugee Claim) / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Substitution of RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in rejecting the claimant's identity based on a discrepancy in year of birth
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred by importing adverse credibility findings into the sur place analysis
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's political activities in Canada and their visibility on social media create a real risk of persecution on return to Djibouti

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD concluded the RPD erred by rejecting identity based solely on a year of birth discrepancy without considering the totality of documentary and oral evidence showing a plausible administrative error; the RAD further concluded the RPD improperly imported adverse credibility findings into the sur place analysis and overlooked objective country evidence showing Djibouti monitors dissent and social media, such that the claimant established a serious possibility of persecution on return; accordingly the RAD set aside the RPD decision and substituted a determination that the claimant is a Convention refugee under ss.111(1)(b) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted: Appellant declared a Convention refugee

Orders

  • Set aside the Refugee Protection Division decision and substitute a determination that the Appellant is a Convention refugee pursuant to ss.111(1)(b) IRPA
  • Refuse admission of Item 1 as new evidence under s.110(4) of the IRPA