MB9-06784
The RAD allowed the appeal because the RPD failed to apply Guidelines 4 and 8 meaningfully, cut off and did not properly hear testimony central to credibility, wrongly dismissed corroborating police and medical documents without adequate basis, and misapplied credibility standards; on re‑weighing the evidence with proper application of the Guidelines, the appellants are credible and are Convention refugees.
Source excerpt
- Gender-based persecution
- Sexual violence
- Credibility assessment
- State protection
- Internal flight alternative
- Chairperson's guidelines 4 and 8