The Tax Court dismissed an appeal for Canada Child Benefit eligibility, holding the appellant was not a protected person under IRPA and rejecting a Charter challenge.
The Federal Court granted judicial review of an H&C refusal, finding the officer applied an exceptionality test, misread psychological evidence, and relied on speculative alternatives.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a work permit refusal under the Start-up Business Class, finding the officer’s reasons reasonable and the application incomplete.
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a refused PRRA, finding the officer’s credibility concerns, documentary doubts, and risk analysis were reasonable.
Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a refused study permit, finding the officer’s financial sufficiency assessment reasonable and no procedural unfairness.
Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision, finding the credibility assessment and treatment of corroborative evidence were reasonable.
The Federal Court granted judicial review of a study permit refusal, finding the officer failed to engage with material contradictory evidence about family ties, finances, and the study plan.
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of an H&C refusal, holding the officer’s assessment of establishment and the child’s best interests was transparent and reasonable.
The RAD affirms the RPD: appellants failed to meet the balance of probabilities to establish credible denunciations and credible threats or to show a profile that would give rise to a serious possibility of persecution; the RPD was justified in analyzing under s.96 (political opinion nexus); admitted post‑decision evidence did not materially alter credibility or risk findings and did not trigger an oral hearing under s.110(6); appeal is dismissed and RPD decision confirmed.
Source excerpt
Credibility assessment
Admissibility of new evidence
Country conditions
Section 96 irpa (convention refugees)
Section 97(1)(b) irpa (persons in need of protection)
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD decision, finding no reviewable error in the assessment of forward-looking risk or the absence of an IFA analysis.