TB4-08625

TB4-08625

Because Spain was a designated country on the day the RPD made its decision, s.110(2)(d.1) IRPA barred any appeal and the RAD lacked jurisdiction, thus the appeal was dismissed.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TB4-08625
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Jurisdictional Dismissal at RAD
Outcome
Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction
Legal Topics
Designation of Country, Jurisdiction, Refugee Protection
Source Language
en
Immigration Law Administrative Law Designation of Country Jurisdiction Refugee Protection

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Jurisdictional Dismissal at RAD

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Appeal Division had jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a national of Spain given a designation under s.109.1(1) IRPA
  2. 2 Whether s.110(2)(d.1) IRPA bars appeals where the country of the claimant was designated on the day of the RPD decision

Ratio Decidendi

Because Spain was a designated country on the day the RPD made its decision, s.110(2)(d.1) IRPA barred any appeal and the RAD lacked jurisdiction, thus the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.