Bjorn Harsanyi

The applicants sought judicial review of a Refugee Protection Division decision rejecting their refugee claims.

The principal applicant, a citizen of Angola, feared persecution from state authorities who suspected him of supporting a separatist group after detaining and torturing his driver and arresting his nephew, both of whom died in detention.

The RPD found the principal applicant credible regarding past events but concluded the fear of forward-looking risk was speculative and that state protection was adequate.

The Federal Court granted the judicial review, finding the RPD unreasonably ignored key evidence supporting an objective fear and erred in its state protection analysis by focusing on government efforts rather than operational effectiveness and by imposing an unreasonable burden on the applicants to investigate police conduct.

The applicant sought judicial review of an immigration officer's decision refusing his application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

The applicant argued the officer erred in assessing his establishment and hardship, conflated the two, and breached procedural fairness by relying on extrinsic evidence and making veiled credibility findings.

The Federal Court dismissed the application, finding the officer's assessment of establishment and hardship reasonable, and concluding no procedural fairness breach occurred.