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
Federal Court granted judicial review of a PRRA decision, finding the officer’s section 96 analysis unreasonable for failing to address evidence of risk tied to Ukrainian nationality.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a RAD decision, finding the evidence supported a private land dispute rather than persecution for imputed political opinion.
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a refugee refusal, finding no right of appeal to the RAD and no unreasonable error in the RPD’s risk findings.
On the balance of probabilities the claimant established birth in Tibet and lack of Indian citizenship rights, making China the sole country of reference; claimant credibly demonstrated nexus to Convention grounds (Tibetan ethnicity, Buddhist religion, political opinion) and, based on credible objective country evidence, showed state protection in China would be unavailable and no internal flight alternative exists; therefore the claimant is a Convention refugee.
Source excerpt
The Panel found the claimants credible, established nexus to Convention grounds (Palestinian ethnicity and perceived political opinion), demonstrated past persecution and a serious forward‑facing risk on return, and showed lack of effective state protection and no viable internal flight alternative; accordingly they meet the definition of Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court dismissed judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division decision upholding a refusal of refugee protection, finding the credibility and IFA analysis reasonable.
On independent review the RAD confirms the RPD: the appellant failed to establish nexus to a Convention ground and failed to prove a personal, non‑generalized risk under s.97 IRPA. Most new evidence was inadmissible or not credible (affidavits deemed suspiciously timed) except one news article; the risk described is criminal/extortionate and shared by others in Colombia, not persecution, so the appeal is dismissed and the RPD decision confirmed.
Source excerpt
The Federal Court granted judicial review, finding the RPD failed to assess the applicant’s section 96 claim and gave no intelligible reasons on nexus.
The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found a viable internal flight alternative in Mérida on balance of probabilities (no evidence the CJNG had motivation to track the appellants there), the appellants' allegations lacked nexus to Convention grounds and thus were assessed under s.97, new evidence was inadmissible because it predated the RPD and could reasonably have been presented, and the compelling reasons exception did not apply.
Source excerpt
The claimant established on a balance of probabilities that he personally faces a real risk to his life or of cruel and unusual treatment from non-state actors (BJP-affiliated gangsters) who have motivation, means and apparent police assistance; that risk is distinct from generalized criminality, state protection is unavailable or ineffective (rebutting the presumption of protection), and there is no viable internal flight alternative; therefore he is a person in need of protection under s.97(1).
Source excerpt
Explore more
