2022 FC, 2022 FC 1060

Date: 20220718 Docket: IMM-3533-21 Citation: 2022 FC 1060 Ottawa, Ontario, July 18, 2022 PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan BETWEEN:MUHAMMED KARAOGLANApplicantandTHE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATIONRespondent REASONS AND JUDGMENT [1] Mr. Muhammed Karaoglan (the "“Applicant”") seeks judicial review of the decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board, RefugeeProtection Division (the "“RPD”"), finding that he is neither a Convention refugee or person in need of protection, pursuant to

section 96and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the "“Act”"). [2] The Applicant is a citizen of Turkey who fears persecution on the basis of his Kurdish ethnicity and political activities. The RPDmade negative credibility findings, based upon an inconsistency in the Applicant’s evidence about the dates he was detained. [3] The decision is reviewable on the standard of reasonableness, following the decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship andImmigration) v.

Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65 , [2019] 4 S.C.R. 653. [4] In considering reasonableness, the Court is to ask if the decision under review "“bears the hallmarks of reasonableness —justification, transparency and intelligibility — and whether it is justified in relation to the relevant factual and legal constraints that bearon that decision”"; see Vavilov, supra at paragraph 99. [5] The Applicant argues that the decision is unreasonable.

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (the "“Respondent”") submitsthat the decision meets the legal standard. [6] Although the Applicant challenges other aspects of the decision, in my opinion, the dispositive issue in this proceeding is the negativecredibility finding. [7] In my opinion, the RPD unreasonably impugned the Applicant’s credibility on the basis of one inconsistency. [8] I also find that the RPD unreasonably failed to consider documentary evidence submitted by the Applicant’s father independent ofthis negative credibility finding. [9] In the result, the application for judicial review will be allowed, the decision will be set aside and the matter remitted to a new panelof the RPD for redetermination.

JUDGMENT in IMM-3533-21 THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review is allowed, the decision is set aside and the matter remitted toa new panel of the Immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Protection Division for redetermination. "E. Heneghan" Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-3533-21

STYLE OF CAUSE: MUHAMMED KARAOGLAN v THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: HELD BY WAY OF VIDEOCONFERENCE BETWEEN TORONTO, ONTARIO AND ST. JOHN’S, NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR DATE OF HEARING: JUNE 14, 2022 REASONS AND JUDGMENT: HENEGHAN J. DATED: JULY 18, 2022 APPEARANCES : Clarissa Waldman FOR THE APPLICANT Nicole Rahaman FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Mithoowani Waldman Immigration Law Group Barrister & Solicitor Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT