TC5-10106

TC5-10106

Applying the Zeng framework the RAD found MY and SE had previously held Panamanian permanent residency that could likely be reacquired; balancing factors (neutral reason for loss, ability to return/reacquire status, minimal country risks in Panama and Portugal, and Canada’s obligations) weigh in favour of exclusion under Article 1E/s.98 IRPA; NL failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or a likely risk of harm in Panama or Portugal, therefore all appeals are dismissed.

Citation
TC5-10106
Parties
Appellant: MY; Appellant: SE; Appellant: NL
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Exclusion Under Article 1 E, Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Country Condition Assessment, Credibility and Reliability, Best Interests of the Child, Judicial Precedent Application
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Exclusion Under Article 1 E Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Country Condition Assessment Credibility and Reliability +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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MY

Appellant

SE

Appellant

NL

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether MY and SE are excluded from protection under Article 1E of the Refugee Convention and s.98 IRPA based on ties to Panama
  2. 2 Whether NL faces a serious possibility of persecution or a likely risk of harm in Panama or Portugal
  3. 3 Whether applicants face persecution in Portugal due to Venezuelan heritage

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the Zeng framework the RAD found MY and SE had previously held Panamanian permanent residency that could likely be reacquired; balancing factors (neutral reason for loss, ability to return/reacquire status, minimal country risks in Panama and Portugal, and Canada’s obligations) weigh in favour of exclusion under Article 1E/s.98 IRPA; NL failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or a likely risk of harm in Panama or Portugal, therefore all appeals are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Reasons for decision issued June 3, 2025 by Michael Madden