MB9-01120

MB9-01120

The appeal is allowed and the RPD decision is set aside because the RPD failed to provide adequate reasons for its adverse credibility finding, failed to consider and weigh corroborative documentary evidence and the totality of the record, and left material questions unanswered; the application to admit new evidence...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
MB9-01120
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal Remitting Matter to RPD
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decision of the RPD set aside and remitted to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Admission of New Evidence (rule 29), Procedural Fairness, Ineffective Assistance of Counsel, Internal Flight Alternative, Remittal to Tribunal
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Findings Admission of New Evidence (rule 29) Procedural Fairness Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Internal Flight Alternative +1 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 6 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal Remitting Matter to RPD

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) adequately justified an adverse credibility finding
  2. 2 Whether the RPD considered the totality of evidence and corroborative documents
  3. 3 Whether new evidence and a new ground (sexual orientation) meet criteria for admission under IRPA s.110(4) and RAD Rule 29

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed and the RPD decision is set aside because the RPD failed to provide adequate reasons for its adverse credibility finding, failed to consider and weigh corroborative documentary evidence and the totality of the record, and left material questions unanswered; the application to admit new evidence and raise a sexual orientation ground on appeal was denied because it did not meet the newness, relevance and probative-value criteria of IRPA s.110(4) and RAD Rule 29; the matter is remitted to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decision of the RPD set aside and remitted to the RPD for redetermination by a differently constituted panel

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Matter remitted to the Refugee Protection Division to be redetermined by a differently constituted panel pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(c) of the IRPA