MB9-22876

MB9-22876

Cumulative conduct of the RPD (interruptions, prejudicial comments, failure to translate exchanges and indications of predetermination) created a reasonable apprehension of bias and denied procedural fairness, undermining the credibility findings; therefore the RAD allows the appeal for the Principal Appellant and the female minor and remits their claims to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel; the male minor's appeal is dismissed because he alleged no risk in his country of citizenship (United States).

Citation
MB9-22876
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX; Minor Female Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Male Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal; Remittal for Redetermination
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part and remitted for redetermination for Principal Appellant and female minor Associate Appellant; appeal dismissed for minor male Associate Appellant.
Legal Topics
Procedural Fairness, Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, New Evidence, Remand
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Procedural Fairness Reasonable Apprehension of Bias Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative New Evidence +1 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Female Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Male Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal; Remittal for Redetermination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the RPD breach procedural fairness by preventing appellants from presenting evidence fully?
  2. 2 Did the RPD's conduct give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias?
  3. 3 Did the RPD fail to assess the female minor associate appellant's risk in her country of citizenship?

Ratio Decidendi

Cumulative conduct of the RPD (interruptions, prejudicial comments, failure to translate exchanges and indications of predetermination) created a reasonable apprehension of bias and denied procedural fairness, undermining the credibility findings; therefore the RAD allows the appeal for the Principal Appellant and the female minor and remits their claims to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel; the male minor's appeal is dismissed because he alleged no risk in his country of citizenship (United States).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part and remitted for redetermination for Principal Appellant and female minor Associate Appellant; appeal dismissed for minor male Associate Appellant.

Orders

  • Refer the matter to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to Immigration and Refugee Protection Act s.111(1)(c).
  • Confirm the Refugee Protection Division decision that the minor male Associate Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection pursuant to Immigration and Refugee Protection Act s.111(1)(a).