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 a judicial review of a RAD refugee decision, finding the FIR and related documents not genuine, and no procedural fairness breach.
La Cour fédérale accueille le contrôle judiciaire et renvoie l’affaire, jugeant déraisonnable l’omission par la SAR d’un élément de preuve central sur un enlèvement lié au requérant.
The Federal Court found the Refugee Appeal Division reasonably upheld a refusal based on a viable internal flight alternative in Mumbai and dismissed judicial review.
The Federal Court allowed judicial review, finding the officer unreasonably failed to address the applicant’s recognized refugee status in Ethiopia.
Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision, holding that the credibility findings against a Mexican family were reasonable and should not be reweighed.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision, holding the Internal Flight Alternative finding in MĂ©rida was reasonable.
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision upholding an internal flight alternative finding for the applicants in Mexico.
Although the initial BOCs showed similarities raising credibility concerns, the RAD found the appellant's detailed narrative and corroborating documentary and country evidence established credibility and a nexus to Convention grounds; there was insufficient evidence of significant participation in crimes for Article 1F exclusion and no state protection or viable internal flight alternative, therefore the appellant is a Convention refugee and the appeal is allowed.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision, finding no unreasonable error in the internal flight alternative analysis.
The Minister's redacted BOCs were admissible; the respondent's BOC contained striking, unexplained similarities to two other BOCs together with material inconsistencies, omissions and weak corroboration; those factors rebut the presumption of truth and undermine credibility, so the RPD's grant of refugee status was incorrect and is set aside with a substituted decision that the respondent is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.
Source excerpt
Explore more
