TB7-06701

TB7-06701

The RPD's adverse credibility finding rested on a misapprehension of the record (reliance on incomplete GCMS notes and an incorrect finding that the appellant testified to bakery employment) and insufficiently tested documentary evidence of self-employment; because these errors go to the core of the claim and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TB7-06701
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division; Matter Referred Back to RPD for Redetermination by a Differently Constituted Panel
Outcome
Appeal allowed; matter referred to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Refugee Protection, Redetermination, Admissibility of New Evidence, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
english
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Refugee Protection Redetermination Admissibility of New Evidence Procedural Fairness

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division; Matter Referred Back to RPD for Redetermination by a Differently Constituted Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility assessment regarding the male appellant's employment and related evidence
  2. 2 Whether the RAD should admit new evidence on appeal
  3. 3 Whether the matter should be referred back to the RPD for redetermination

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's adverse credibility finding rested on a misapprehension of the record (reliance on incomplete GCMS notes and an incorrect finding that the appellant testified to bakery employment) and insufficiently tested documentary evidence of self-employment; because these errors go to the core of the claim and outstanding credibility and documentary issues remain untested, the RAD cannot substitute its own decision and must refer the matter back to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; matter referred to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination by a differently constituted panel.

Orders

  • Refer matter to RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(c)
  • RPD directed to request the paper version of the male appellant's 2014 Canadian visa application from relevant Canadian authorities