TB3-04610

RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : TB3-04610 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Reasons and decision ? Motifs et décision Person(s) who is(are) the subject of the appeal XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX) Personne(s) en cause Appeal considered / heard at Toronto, Ontario Appel instruit à Date of decision August 12, 2013 Date de la décision Panel Ken Atkinson Tribunal Counsel for the person(s) who is(are)the subject of the appeal Ronald Yacoub Conseil(s) du (de la/des) personne(s) en cause Designated Representative(s) N/A Représentant(e)(s) désigné(e)(s) Counsel for the Minister N/A Conseil du (de la) 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 XXXX. [2] The person who is the subject of the appeal was referred to the RPD on April 3, 2013. According to the Notice of Appeal, the person is appealing a decision of the RPD dated June 21, 2013 with written reasons received on June 28, 2013 rejecting the claim for refugee protection. [3] The appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the appeal is in respect of a decision by the RPD from which no appeal may be made under s. 110(2)(d) of the amended Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). This section states the following: 110.(2) 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 IRPA is the United States of America (USA). The appellant in this case came directly from the USA but was nonetheless eligible to make a claim by virtue of the regulations. According to paragraph 110(2)(d) of the IRPA, no appeal may be made in respect of the RPD's decision. [5] Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. (signed) Ken Atkinson Ken Atkinson August 12, 2013 Date RAD.25.02 (April 9, 2013) Disponible en français RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : TB3-04610