
Immigration & Refugee judgments from Canadian courts and tribunals, with a plain-English summary, the legal holding and frequently asked questions.
The Federal Court found that the decision to refuse a PRRA application was procedurally unfair and unreasonable because the immigration officer required corroborative evidence without addressing any credibility concerns.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Appeal Division refusing the applicant's appeal and confirming the Refugee Protection Division's decision to refuse the applicant's refugee protection claim.
The Federal Court granted a judicial review of a Colombian family's refugee claim due to translation errors during the hearing. The court found that these errors affected the credibility assessment and granted the review to a different decision-maker.
In a recent Federal Court decision, the court rejected a claimant's request for a decision on a spousal sponsorship application before being removed from Canada. The court determined that the claimant did not meet the necessary criteria for obtaining declaratory relief or a writ of mandamus, emphasizing the need for comprehensive security checks during the immigration process.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review challenging a negative Pre-Removal Risk Assessment decision. The court ruled that the applicant did not provide enough personalized evidence to prove a risk of persecution or harm if returned to Egypt.
The Federal Court dismissed a judicial review challenging a decision that found the applicants would not face a risk of harm if returned to Sweden. The court ruled that the decision was reasonable and procedurally fair.
The Federal Court dismissed an application for judicial review, ruling that minors did not individually establish a risk of persecution if returned to India, despite their mother's granted protection status. The court emphasized that each family member must prove their own risk of persecution separately.