TB6-14564

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 : TB6-14564 TB6-14565 TB6-14566 TB6-14567 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Reasons and decision ? Motifs et décision Person(s) who is(are) the subject of the appeal XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personne(s) en cause Appeal considered / heard at Toronto, Ontario Appel instruit à Date of decision November 15, 2016 Date de la décision Panel Deborah Morrish Tribunal Counsel for the person(s) who is(are)the subject of the appeal John M. Guoba Barrister and Solicitor 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 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, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX. [2] The Notice of Appeal was received by the RAD on October 14, 2016. The persons are appealing a decision of the RPD dated September 21, 2016 with written reasons received on September 30, 2016 rejecting their 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 for which no appeal may be made under section 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 section 102(2)(d) of the IRPA is the United States. The persons in this case came directly from the United States but was nonetheless eligible to make a claim by virtue of the regulations. Therefore, under section 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) "Deborah Morrish" Deborah Morrish November 15, 2016 Date RAD.25.02 (June 23, 2014) RAD File No. / N° de dossier de la SAR : TB6-14564 TB6-14565 TB6-14566 TB6-14567