TB4-12068
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to perfect the appeal within the 30-day time limit and did not request an extension, entitling the RAD to dismiss for lack of perfection under s.159.91(1)(b) and RAD Rule 3.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- TB4-12068
- Parties
- Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
- Court
- Refugee Appeal Division
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 9 February 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Refugee Appeal / Dismissal for Failure to Perfect Appeal (rad)
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for lack of perfection.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Perfection, Time Limits, RAD Rule 3, S.159.91(1)(b)
- 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 XXXX
Appellant
Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Dismissal for Failure to Perfect Appeal (rad)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the appeal was perfected within the regulatory time limit
- 2 Whether an extension of time to perfect was sought or granted
- 3 Whether failure to perfect requires dismissal under the Regulations and RAD Rules
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to perfect the appeal within the 30-day time limit and did not request an extension, entitling the RAD to dismiss for lack of perfection under s.159.91(1)(b) and RAD Rule 3.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed for lack of perfection.
Orders
- Appeal dismissed for lack of perfection.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : TB4-12068 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Reasons and decision ? Motifs et décision Person(s) who is(are) the subject of the appeal XXXX XXXX XXXX Personne(s) en cause Appeal considered / heard at Toronto, Ontario Appel instruit à Date of decision February 9, 2015 Date de la décision Panel Ken Atkinson Tribunal Counsel for the person(s) who is(are)the subject of the appeal Amanpreet Singh Nagpal Conseil(s) du (de la/des) personne(s) en cause Barrister & Solicitor Designated Representative(s) N/A Représentant(e)(s) désigné(e)(s) Counsel for the Minister N/A Conseil du ministre REASONS FOR DECISION [1] The Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) received a Notice of Appeal from the decision of the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) in the claim of XXXX XXXX. [2] The Notice of Appeal was received by RAD on December 5, 2014, from the person who is the subject of appeal ("person"). According to the Notice of Appeal, the person is appealing a decision of the RPD dated November 19, 2014, with written reasons received by the person on November 24, 2014, rejecting claim for refugee protection. [3] According to the RAD records, the RPD decision was dated November 20, 2014 and was deemed to be received by XXXX XXXX on November 27, 2014. [4] In accordance with the amended Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, section 159.91(1)(b) provides that the time limit for a person to perfect an appeal is 30 days after the day on which the person or the Minister receives written reasons for the decision. [5] The Appellant's Record was due to be received by the Division on or before December 29, 2014 and perfected in accordance with RAD Rule 3. To date, the Division has received neither the Appellant's Record nor an application for an extension of time to perfect an appeal from the persons. [6] Therefore, the appeal is dismissed for lack of perfection. (signed) 'Ken Atkinson' Ken Atkinson February 9, 2015 Date RAD.25.02 (June 23, 2014) RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : TB4-12068