1 total
Judicial review granted; RAD's adverse credibility finding unreasonable for microscopic analysis and ignoring torture trauma.
The applicant sought judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) decision dismissing his refugee claim based on adverse credibility findings.
The Federal Court found the RAD's decision unreasonable because it engaged in a microscopic analysis of peripheral details, failed to consider the applicant's affidavit explaining issues with the RPD hearing, and failed to account for the impact of the applicant's claimed torture on his ability to give consistent testimony.
The application for judicial review was granted and the matter remitted for reconsideration.
