TB5-00186

TB5-00186

The RAD concluded the RPD erred in law and in parts of its fact-finding: it admitted one affidavit correcting a translation error but rejected other late documents as reasonably available before rejection; it found the RPD's analysis on Roma ethnicity lacked legal foundation and accepted that the appellants are half...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TB5-00186
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / RAD Decision Referring Matter Back to RPD for Re Determination by a Differently Constituted Panel
Outcome
Decision of the RPD found wrong in law and referred to RPD for re-determination by a differently-constituted panel
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Admissibility of New Evidence, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Ethnicity Based Persecution, Procedural Fairness, Standard of Review
Source Language
english
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Findings Admissibility of New Evidence State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Ethnicity Based Persecution +2 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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / RAD Decision Referring Matter Back to RPD for Re Determination by a Differently Constituted Panel

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether new evidence on appeal is admissible under s.110(4) IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings regarding Roma ethnicity
  3. 3 Whether translation error and medical report were reasonably assessed

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD concluded the RPD erred in law and in parts of its fact-finding: it admitted one affidavit correcting a translation error but rejected other late documents as reasonably available before rejection; it found the RPD's analysis on Roma ethnicity lacked legal foundation and accepted that the appellants are half Roma; because state protection and internal flight alternative were not adequately explored in light of Roma ethnicity, the matter must be referred back to the RPD for re-determination by a differently-constituted panel with directions to examine those issues.

Court Disposition

Decision of the RPD found wrong in law and referred to RPD for re-determination by a differently-constituted panel

Orders

  • Refer matter to the Refugee Protection Division for re-determination by a differently-constituted panel pursuant to ss.111(1)(c) and 111(2) IRPA
  • Admit affidavit of legal assistant correcting translation of medical document