TB5-00221

TB5-00221

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Appellant was excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E and s.98 IRPA because he retains substantially similar rights in Greece (right to return, work, study and basic social services); the Appellant's proposed new evidence was inadmissible under s.110(4) and no oral hearing was warranted under s.110(6); accordingly the RPD was not wrong in its exclusion finding and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TB5-00221
Parties
Appellant: XXXXXXXX; Intervenor/respondent: Canada Border Services Agency / Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) / Decision on Appeal (final)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, Right to Return, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110 Irpa), Oral Hearing (s.110(6) Irpa), Standard of Review and Deference, RAD Role and Remedies (s.111 Irpa)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Article 1 E Exclusion Right to Return Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110 Irpa) Oral Hearing (s.110(6) Irpa) Standard of Review and Deference +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXX

Appellant

Canada Border Services Agency / Minister

Intervenor/respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) / Decision on Appeal (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant is excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention and s.98 IRPA due to Greek residency status
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant lost Greek status or the right to return to Greece
  3. 3 Admissibility of new evidence on appeal under s.110(4) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Appellant was excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E and s.98 IRPA because he retains substantially similar rights in Greece (right to return, work, study and basic social services); the Appellant's proposed new evidence was inadmissible under s.110(4) and no oral hearing was warranted under s.110(6); accordingly the RPD was not wrong in its exclusion finding and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
  • Appellant excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention and s.98 of the IRPA