Category: Subjective Fear of Persecution

The Court set aside a finding that there was no nexus. It was clear that the reason behind the persecution was the applicant's religious beliefs.

The Court set aside a decision base don inconsistencies in the POE notes due to the fact they were not translated to her. The court also noted htere is no requirement for subjective fear under section 97.

The Court set aside a decision holding that the tribunal erred in not making a credibility finding and not doing a proper assessment of state protection.

The tribunal made no adverse credibility finding but found no subjective fear The Court set aside the decision finding it unreasonable

The Court set aside the decision rejecting a claim to refugee status. The tribunal accepted that the applicant was a Tamil from the north and was required to assess the claim against the objective evidence.

The tribunals finding on lack of subjective fear due to reavailment was unreasonable given that the Applicant was deported back to his country and therefore did not return voluntarily.

The Court set aside a decision rejecting a claim. The finding of lack of subjective fear was unreasonable given the lack of a credibility finding.

The Court set aside a decision rejecting a claim for refugee status. The Board denied natural justice by not disclosing a document it relied on to reject the claim. The Board erred in finding state protection when the state agents were the agents of persecution. Also the Board erred in finding no subjective fear given there was no credibility finding.

The Court set aside a decision that the Applicant had re availed and had no subjective fear Having made no credibility finding it was unreasonable to find no subjective fear. The tribunal also erred in finding the applicant re availed himself given the evidence of lack of intent to reavail

The Court applied the jurisprudence holding that a lack of subjective fear should only be made in the context of an adverse credibility finding citing "Shanmugarajah v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1992] F.C.J. No. 583, at paragraph 3 "it is almost always foolhardy for a Board in a refugee case, where there is no general issue is to credibility, to make the assertion that the claimants had no subjective element in their fear".