TB9-07613

TB9-07613

The RPD's adverse credibility findings regarding the subpoena, the absence of a coercive summons, and the appellants' exit on genuine passports were not supported by adequate exploration of the evidence; given these foundational errors and insufficient record evidence, the RAD cannot confirm or substitute findings and must allow the appeal and refer the matter to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA.

Citation
TB9-07613
Parties
Appellant: Principal Appellant; Appellant: Associate Appellant
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Protection Division Decision Reviewed by Refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision — Allowed and Remitted for Redetermination
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decision of the RPD cannot be confirmed and is remitted for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Sur Place Claim, Remittal for Redetermination, Golden Shield/exit Records, Evidence and Procedure
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Findings Sur Place Claim Remittal for Redetermination Golden Shield/exit Records Evidence and Procedure

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant

Appellant

Associate Appellant

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Protection Division Decision Reviewed by Refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision — Allowed and Remitted for Redetermination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD's adverse credibility findings were reasonable and adequately explored
  2. 2 Whether the People's Court subpoena on the record was genuine or fraudulent
  3. 3 Whether the absence of a coercive summons or arrest warrant undermines the appellants' claim of PSB pursuit

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's adverse credibility findings regarding the subpoena, the absence of a coercive summons, and the appellants' exit on genuine passports were not supported by adequate exploration of the evidence; given these foundational errors and insufficient record evidence, the RAD cannot confirm or substitute findings and must allow the appeal and refer the matter to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decision of the RPD cannot be confirmed and is remitted for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Matter referred to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to s.111(1)(c) IRPA