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 RPD credibility decision in a refugee claim based on sexual orientation, finding the panel’s concerns and treatment of corroborative evidence were reasonable.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision, finding the adverse credibility findings, use of corroboration, and procedural fairness analysis reasonable.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD refugee decision, upholding adverse credibility findings about the applicant’s sexual-orientation-based claim and related documentary inconsistencies.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD decision refusing a refugee claim based on credibility findings, holding there was no procedural unfairness.
The Federal Court granted judicial review, finding the RAD unreasonably failed to assess cumulative discrimination in the first prong of the IFA test.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD decision, finding it reasonable to refuse new evidence and to uphold adverse credibility findings in a SOGIESC refugee claim.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD decision rejecting a Tanzanian applicant’s refugee claim, finding the credibility analysis and treatment of SOGIESC guidelines reasonable.
The Federal Court dismissed a motion to reconsider its earlier leave dismissal, finding no overlooked matter under Rule 397(1)(b) and no basis to admit later evidence.
Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD decision upholding rejection of a refugee claim based on sexual orientation, finding no procedural unfairness and no unreasonable credibility analysis.
Claimant's credible testimony and corroborating evidence establish membership in the particular social group of bisexual men, an objectively well‑founded risk of persecution in Kenya given criminalisation and societal hostility, inadequate state protection, and no viable internal flight alternative; 1E exclusion does not apply on the evidence; therefore claimant meets the definition of a Convention refugee and is entitled to protection.
Source excerpt
Explore more
