1 total
Judicial review granted; RAD unreasonably failed to assess past persecution for compelling reasons exception.
The applicant sought judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) decision upholding the rejection of her refugee claim.
The applicant alleged a fear of her abusive father in Mexico, but the RAD found her father had abandoned her, negating forward-looking risk.
The applicant argued the RAD unreasonably failed to assess whether there were compelling reasons arising out of past persecution to grant protection under subsection 108(4) of the IRPA.
The Federal Court held the RAD unreasonably ignored the issue of past persecution, rendering its failure to conduct a compelling reasons analysis circular and flawed.
The application was granted and the matter remanded for redetermination.
