Esheria Canada Case Law
Sign in
Canada Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

Canada Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
2 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter Canada case law

Results update automatically as you type.

Canada decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Immigration law TB9-03379

TB9-03379

Court
Refugee Appeal Division

The RPD erred in finding exclusion under Articles 1F(b) and 1F(c) because the Minister did not meet the burden of proving serious reasons for considering the appellant was involved in a terrorist bomb plot; however the appellant was found not credible, failed to discharge the burden to prove inclusion under sections 96 or 97 on a balance of probabilities, and failed to present sufficient corroborative documentary evidence or establish a forward-looking risk based on ethnicity or political activity, therefore the appeal is dismissed and the RPD decision is confirmed for other reasons (appellan…

Source excerpt

  • Exclusion under article 1f(b) and 1f(c) of the refugee convention
  • Credibility assessment
  • Admissibility of new evidence (s.110(4) irpa, rule 29)
  • Sections 96 and 97 irpa risk assessment
  • Country conditions and ethnicity (azeri)
Read case analysis
Immigration law MA5-05605

MA5-05605

Court
Refugee Protection Division

On the balance of probabilities the tribunal found both adult claimants were members of the LTTE and the documentary record established the LTTE is an organisation with a limited and brutal purpose; therefore mere membership excluded both adults from refugee protection under Article 1F (a) and (c)/Section 98 IRPA. The older child faces a serious possibility of forced conscription and is a Convention refugee under Section 96 IRPA; the younger child is not at present at risk and is not in need of protection.

Source excerpt

  • Refugee protection
  • Exclusion under article 1f/section 98 irpa
  • Child conscription
  • Credibility assessment
  • Membership in terrorist organization
  • Protection elsewhere
Read case analysis
Immigration law MA3-06064

MA3-06064

Court
Refugee Protection Division

Based on the claimant's admissions to immigration authorities that he was a member of the Tigers, documentary evidence of the Tigers' atrocities, and the Ramirez factors showing voluntary association, duration, roles (digging bunkers, working on celebrations) and knowledge of the organisation's methods, the panel concluded the claimant was complicit and therefore excluded under Article 1F(a) and 1F(c); alternatively, the claimant's inconsistent testimony and lack of credibility meant he did not establish refugee or protection claims.

Source excerpt

  • Exclusion under art. 1f
  • Forced recruitment
  • Guerilla warfare
  • Membership in terrorist organization
  • Credibility and inconsistent statements
  • Port of entry statements
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

Canada decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.