Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Canada decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of an inadmissibility finding, holding the Immigration Division reasonably found a veiled State policy and knowing, voluntary complicity.
The Federal Court set aside a PRRA refusal because the officer wrongly treated a prior cessation finding as something the applicant had to “overcome” before current risk could be assessed.
The Panel accepted the claimants' identities and credible, corroborated evidence establishing the principal claimant’s long‑standing opposition to the Putin regime and recent anti‑war activity; objective country evidence shows laws criminalizing anti‑war speech and systemic repression with impunity; the Minister provided no evidence of exclusion and withdrew intervention under Article 1F(a); state protection is unavailable and no viable internal flight alternative exists; therefore the claimants meet the definition of Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court upheld a finding that the applicant was inadmissible under IRPA s. 35(1)(b), relying on the “top half” test for senior military officials.
The appeal is dismissed because adverse credibility findings undermined the core allegations (scarification and FGM), the objective evidence did not support that the chieftaincy rites included FGM, corroboration was insufficient and inconsistencies were not reasonably explained; therefore the appellants failed to establish Convention refugee status or a need for protection on a balance of probabilities.
Source excerpt
The Panel found the claimants credible and established on a balance of probabilities that they face a serious possibility of persecution by the Tren de Aragua in Venezuela and Colombia linked to political opinion and family membership; objective country evidence and the claimants’ failed attempts to obtain effective protection rebut the presumption of available state protection and negate any viable internal flight alternative; the associated claimant is not excluded under Article 1E because he lost permanent status for reasons beyond his control and cannot return to renew it; therefore the c…
Source excerpt
The RAD dismisses the appeal because the RPD correctly found a viable internal flight alternative in Bengaluru: on the balance of probabilities agents of harm lack motivation to pursue the appellants beyond Kerala and relocation to Bengaluru would not be unduly harsh, therefore appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court found the RPD’s refugee decision unreasonable for failing to address the STCA close-family exception and for assessing risk in Lebanon after finding it was not a former habitual residence.
The claimant was found credible and demonstrated membership in the Church of Almighty God, there is objective country evidence of systematic persecution of unregistered religious groups, the state is effectively the agent of persecution so protection is unavailable and no viable internal flight alternative exists; accordingly the claimant meets the definition of a Convention refugee under Section 96 of IRPA.
Source excerpt
On an independent review and on the balance of probabilities the evidence does not establish an objective basis for a well-founded fear of persecution or a section 97 risk: reconciliation and long-term contact with family, documentary country evidence showing Lagos is not a Boko Haram stronghold, and lack of credible evidence that the U.S. minors face risk in the United States mean the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96 and 97 IRPA.
Source excerpt
Explore more
