MB4-03235
Because the claimant's refugee protection claim was referred to the RPD on February 3, 2011, which is before the August 15, 2012 coming into force of section 36(1) of the BRRA (as amended by PCISA), subsection 36(1) applies to bar appeals to the RAD and therefore the RAD lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- MB4-03235
- Parties
- Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
- Court
- Refugee Appeal Division
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 25 August 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Jurisdictional Determination
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
- Legal Topics
- Jurisdiction, Statutory Interpretation, Temporal Application of Statute
- 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 to the Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Jurisdictional Determination
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the RAD has jurisdiction to hear an appeal from an RPD decision where the refugee claim was referred to the RPD before August 15, 2012
- 2 Whether subsection 36(1) of the Balanced Refugee Reform Act, as amended by the Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act, bars the appeal
Ratio Decidendi
Because the claimant's refugee protection claim was referred to the RPD on February 3, 2011, which is before the August 15, 2012 coming into force of section 36(1) of the BRRA (as amended by PCISA), subsection 36(1) applies to bar appeals to the RAD and therefore the RAD lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Orders
- Appeal dismissed
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 : MB4-03235 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Reasons and decision ? Motifs et décision Person who is the subject of the appeal XXXX XXXX XXXX Personne en cause Appeal considered / heard at Montréal, Québec Appel instruit à Date of decision August 25, 2014 Date de la décision Panel Me Diane Sokolyk Tribunal Counsel for the person(s) who is(are) the subject of the appeal Me Adam Wierzchowski Conseil(s) du (de la/des) personne(s) en cause Counsel for the Minister N/A Conseil du ministre REASONS FOR DECISION [1] On August 18, 2014, the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) received a notice of appeal regarding the decision rendered by the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) on July 30, 2014, in the claim for refugee protection filed by XXXX XXXX XXXX (the "appellant"). The appellant is reputed to have received the RPD decision and written reasons on August 4, 2014. [2] The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal deals with a refugee protection claim that was referred to the RPD before the coming into force of section 36 of the Balanced Refugee Reform Act (BRRA), as amended by the Protecting Canada's Immigration System Act (PCISA). In accordance with the order published on August 15, 2012, in the Canada Gazette, section 36 of the BRRA, as amended by the PCISA, came into force on that day. According to subsection 36(1), a decision made by the RPD in respect of a claim for refugee protection that was referred to that Division before August 15, 2012, is not subject to appeal to the RAD. The refugee protection claim was referred to the RPD on February 3, 2011; therefore, the decision is not subject to appeal to the RAD. [3] The appeal is dismissed. Diane Sokolyk Me Diane Sokolyk August 25, 2014 Date /mar 1 RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : MB4-03235