VB5-03851
Because the appellant came from the United States, a country designated by regulation, and was nonetheless eligible to make a claim by virtue of the regulations, paragraph 110(2)(d) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act bars an appeal to the RAD; the RAD therefore lacks jurisdiction and the appeal is dismissed.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- VB5-03851
- Parties
- Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)
- Court
- Refugee Appeal Division
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 7 January 2016
- Procedural Posture
- Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Received; Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction, Appeals Restriction, Designation of Countries
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
XXXX XXXX
Appellant
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Received; Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the RAD has jurisdiction under paragraph 110(2)(d) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to hear an appeal of an RPD decision when the claimant came to Canada from a country designated under the regulations (United States) but remained eligible to make a claim by virtue of the regulations.
Ratio Decidendi
Because the appellant came from the United States, a country designated by regulation, and was nonetheless eligible to make a claim by virtue of the regulations, paragraph 110(2)(d) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act bars an appeal to the RAD; the RAD therefore lacks jurisdiction and the appeal is dismissed.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Orders
- The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to paragraph 110(2)(d) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Refugee Appeal Division Commission de l'immigration et du statut de réfugié du Canada Section d'appel des réfugiés RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : VB5-03851 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Reasons and decision ? Motifs et décision Person(s) who is(are) XXXX XXXX Personne(s) en cause the subject of the appeal Appeal considered / heard at Vancouver, BC Appel instruit à Date of decision January 7, 2016 Date de la décision Panel Douglas Fortney Tribunal Counsel for the person(s) who is(are) N/A Conseil(s) du (de la/des) the subject of the appeal personne(s) en cause Designated representative N/A Représentant(e) désigné(e) Counsel for the Minister Jennifer Woloshyn Conseil du ministre REASONS FOR DECISION [1] The Refugee Appeal Division (the "RAD") received on December 11, 2015 a Notice of Appeal from the decision of the Refugee Protection Division (the "RPD") in the claim of XXXX XXXX (the "appellant"), a national of Pakistan. [2] According to RAD records, the appellant is appealing the Notice of Decision of the RPD dated November 27, 2015. [3] The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal is in respect of a decision by the RPD for which no appeal may be made under paragraph 110(2)(d) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (the "Act").1 This section states the following: 110(2) Restriction on appeals - No appeal may be made in respect of any of the following: (d) subject to the regulations, a decision of the Refugee Protection Division in respect of a claim for refugee protection if (i) the foreign national who makes the claim came directly or indirectly to Canada from a country that is, on the day on which their claim is made, designated by regulations made under subsection 102(1) and that is a party to an agreement referred to in paragraph 102(2)(d), and (ii) the claim - by virtue of regulations made under paragraph 102(1)(c) - is not ineligible under paragraph 101(1)(e) to be referred to the Refugee Protection Division; [4] The only country that is designated by regulation and party to an agreement under paragraph 102(2)(d) of the Act is the United States. The appellant in this case came directly from the United States but was nonetheless eligible to make a claim by virtue of the regulations. Therefore, under paragraph 110(2)(d) of the Act, no appeal may be made in respect of the RPD's decision. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. (signed) "Douglas Fortney" Douglas Fortney January 7, 2016 Date 1 Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27. --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : VB5-03851