TB3-09544

TB3-09544

On the balance of probabilities the panel accepted the Minister's biometric and documentary evidence showing the respondent and the US asylee are the same person, found the respondent's explanations and supporting evidence insufficient or unreliable to rebut that proof, concluded the original RPD decision was obtained by misrepresentation and withholding of material facts and that no other sufficient evidence existed to justify protection, and therefore granted the s.109 application to vacate and nullified the 2003 refugee decision.

Citation
TB3-09544
Parties
Claimant/protected Person: XXXX XXXX XXXX (A.K.A. XXXX XXXX) (A.K.A. XXXX XXXX) (A.K.A. XXXX XXXX XXXX); Applicant/minister: Minister of Public Safety; Adjudicator: K. Khamsi
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Section 109 IRPA Application to Vacate Refugee Protection / Decision on Application to Vacate (final)
Outcome
Minister's application granted; respondent's Convention refugee status vacated and claim deemed rejected
Legal Topics
Vacation of Refugee Protection, Misrepresentation, Identity Fraud, Biometric Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Vacation of Refugee Protection Misrepresentation Identity Fraud Biometric Evidence

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX (A.K.A. XXXX XXXX) (A.K.A. XXXX XXXX) (A.K.A. XXXX XXXX XXXX)

Claimant/protected Person

Minister of Public Safety

Applicant/minister

K. Khamsi

Adjudicator

Procedural Posture

Section 109 IRPA Application to Vacate Refugee Protection / Decision on Application to Vacate (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent obtained refugee protection by misrepresenting or withholding material facts under s.109 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the respondent and a US asylee are the same person despite assertions they are brothers
  3. 3 Whether evidence before the original RPD was sufficient absent the alleged misrepresentation

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the panel accepted the Minister's biometric and documentary evidence showing the respondent and the US asylee are the same person, found the respondent's explanations and supporting evidence insufficient or unreliable to rebut that proof, concluded the original RPD decision was obtained by misrepresentation and withholding of material facts and that no other sufficient evidence existed to justify protection, and therefore granted the s.109 application to vacate and nullified the 2003 refugee decision.

Court Disposition

Minister's application granted; respondent's Convention refugee status vacated and claim deemed rejected

Orders

  • Vacate and nullify the Refugee Protection Division decision of November 12, 2003
  • Respondent's claim deemed rejected pursuant to section 109 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act