TC0-09310

TC0-09310

Admitted the new medical and country‑condition evidence; accepted that the Principal Appellant's cranial fracture and documented cognitive impairment reasonably explain testimonial inconsistencies and remove adverse credibility inferences; found objective and testimonial evidence establishes a serious possibility of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TC0-09310
Parties
Appellant: Principal Appellant; Appellant: Associate Appellant (spouse of Principal Appellant); Appellant: Argentinian Appellant 1 (minor); Appellant: Argentinian Appellant 2 (minor); Appellant: Adult Male Appellant; Appellant: Adult Female Appellant (spouse of Adult Male Appellant)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision recognizing appellants as Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Status, Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Admission of New Evidence, Ethnic Persecution (roma)
Source Language
english
Immigration and Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Convention Refugee Status Credibility Assessment State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Admission of New Evidence +1 more

Source-derived case record

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant

Appellant

Associate Appellant (spouse of Principal Appellant)

Appellant

Argentinian Appellant 1 (minor)

Appellant

Argentinian Appellant 2 (minor)

Appellant

Adult Male Appellant

Appellant

Adult Female Appellant (spouse of Adult Male Appellant)

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed new evidence is admissible and warrants a hearing
  2. 2 Whether medical evidence explains credibility concerns about appellant testimony
  3. 3 Whether appellants face a serious possibility of persecution in Romania on account of Roma ethnicity

Ratio Decidendi

Admitted the new medical and country‑condition evidence; accepted that the Principal Appellant's cranial fracture and documented cognitive impairment reasonably explain testimonial inconsistencies and remove adverse credibility inferences; found objective and testimonial evidence establishes a serious possibility of cumulative anti‑Roma discrimination amounting to persecution in both Romania and Argentina; found state protection and internal flight alternatives are not operationally adequate; substituted decision to recognize appellants as Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision recognizing appellants as Convention refugees.

Orders

  • New medical and country‑condition evidence admitted into the record
  • Substitute decision issued: appellants recognized as Convention refugees