Digests

Divsalar v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

IMM-1246-01

2002 FCT 653, Blanchard J.

10/6/02

15 pp.

Application for judicial review of CRDD decision applicant not Convention refugee--Applicant, citizen of Iran, claiming well-founded fear of persecution on basis of perceived political opinions--Decided to flee after part-time employee arrested with anti-regime flyers in applicant's company car-- CRDD found applicant's story regarding culminating incident, on day of students' demonstrations and turmoil in Tehran, surrounding departure from Iran not plausible or credible and concluded that applicant not Convention refugee--Issues whether CRDD failed to assess credible evidence before it to determine well-foundedness of applicant's fear of persecution; whether CRDD committed reviewable error in assessment of evidence with regard to well-foundedness of applicant's claim--Application allowed--As to applicable standard of review, CRDD has complete jurisdiction to determine plausibility of testimony, and findings not open to judicial review so long as inferences drawn not so unreasonable as to warrant intervention: Aguebor v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1993), 160 N.R. 315 (F.C.A.); so long as reasons supported by evidence before panel--Even if Tehran in turmoil on day of culminating incident, if applicant or employee not directly involved in students' demonstrations, applicant's inquiry into whether employee driving his car involved in accident not implausible--Also, insufficient evidence to support CRDD's finding not plausible that employee's family did not take action or had not gotten back to applicant--No evidence family had knowledge of arrest-- Finding therefore based on speculation--No evidence to support CRDD's finding that not plausible for client, Department of Justice employee, to obtain information and details of investigation in just few hours--Not reasonably open to CRDD to find not plausible that authorities would not have visited claimant during 24 hours that elapsed before applicant allegedly fled, especially during period of intense crackdown on dissidents--Finding on international driver's licence not sufficiently material to afford it import that would warrant general finding of lack of credibility or rejection of claim--In conclusion, many of plausibility findings discussed above not reasonably open to CRDD--Contradictions found by CRDD not material or of such import as to warrant general finding of lack of credibility or rejection of claim--CRDD's findings of implausibility made without regard for evidence before it and therefore perverse, warranting intervention of Court.