Digests

Irrippuge v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

IMM-2784-98, IMM-2969-98, IMM-2089-98, IMM-2166-98

Sharlow J.

10/1/00

21 pp.

00, 10pp.)Four applications for judicial review having in common one issue relating to procedure adopted by Convention Refugee Determination Division (CRDD) in rendering negative refugee decisions--Reasons rendered orally at conclusion of hearing--Target of renewed attack on oral negative decisions document entitled "Expectation Agreement"--In fall of 1997, senior officials of CRDD agreed in principle to adopt priorities relating to handling of workload of CRDD--None of four decisions under review should be quashed solely on basis rendered orally after implementation of Expectation Agreement--Applicant Irrippuge 24-year-old Sinhalese citizen of Sri Lanka--Claimed well-founded fear of persecution by Sri Lankan government, agents on basis of political opinions, membership in particular social group, namely Sinhalese suspected of supporting Liberation Tigers of Talim Eelam (LTTE) by virtue of association with Tamils--CRDD finding applicant's story implausible for several reasons--Applicant not claiming to be Tamil sympathizer, only that authorities believed he was Tamil sympathizer--Claim must be seen as consistent with unjustified arrest--Logic underlying CRDD's decision so flawed decision patently unreasonable--Decision quashed-- Applicant Mendis 32-year-old Sinhalese citizen of Sri Lanka--Claimed same well-founded fear of persecution--If applicant perceived as Tamil sympathizer, may be one of rare Sinhalese persons at risk, whether perception of political opinion correct or incorrect--CRDD's reasons for finding Ms. Mendis' story implausible flawed in several respects--CRDD's decision patently unreasonable, quashed--Applicant Kanapathipillai 40-year-old Tamil citizen of Sri Lanka claiming well founded fear of persecution by LTTE, Sri Lankan government, People's Liberation Army of Tamil Eelam (PLATE)--Claim denied primarily on basis of credibility--CRDD noted several inconsistencies, contradictions in Mr. Kanapathipillai's evidence--CRDD's negative assessment of applicant's credibility not unreasonable--Several inconsistencies in evidence not satisfactorily explained--No basis for quashing decision--Applicant Mao Chun Qiu citizen of China--Claimed well-founded fear of persecution by government of China based on religion, violation of China's family planning policy--CRDD concluding claimant not persecuted for practising religion in China--Whether intended to be statement of principle or finding of fact, conclusion could not be supported on uncontradicted, apparently credible evidence of Mr. Qiu, therefore patently unreasonable--Decision quashed.