TB8-17254

TB8-17254

The RPD's blanket negative credibility finding and failure to consider objective country documentation and the cumulative nature of discriminatory treatment were incorrect; the appellants presented credible evidence, corroborated by country documentation, showing a serious possibility of persecution on the basis of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TB8-17254
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Appeal Decision (refugee Appeal Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted; appellants declared Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Credibility Assessment, Cumulative Persecution, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Ethnic Discrimination (roma), Country Condition Evidence
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Determination Credibility Assessment Cumulative Persecution State Protection +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Appeal Decision (refugee Appeal Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its negative credibility finding
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in assessing cumulative persecution
  3. 3 Whether the appellants rebutted presumption of state protection

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's blanket negative credibility finding and failure to consider objective country documentation and the cumulative nature of discriminatory treatment were incorrect; the appellants presented credible evidence, corroborated by country documentation, showing a serious possibility of persecution on the basis of Roma ethnicity, inadequate state protection, and no viable internal flight alternative; therefore the RAD set aside the RPD decision and substituted its own determination that the appellants are Convention refugees under IRPA s.111(1)(b).

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted; appellants declared Convention refugees.

Orders

  • RPD determination set aside
  • RAD substitutes its own determination that the appellants are Convention refugees pursuant to section 111(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act