1507928 (Refugee)

The applicant, a citizen of Zimbabwe, sought review of the Refugee Tribunal's decision to refuse to grant a protection visa. The applicant claimed to fear persecution in Zimbabwe due to an imputed political opinion, specifically his alleged support for an opposition political party. The Tribunal had found the applicant's claims not to be credible, citing inconsistencies in his evidence and a lack of sufficient political involvement to attract adverse attention from the authorities.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the Tribunal had erred in its assessment of the applicant's credibility and, consequently, in its determination that the applicant did not hold a well-founded fear of persecution. This involved considering the applicant's level of political involvement, the relevance of past incidents with authorities, and the impact of a significant cognitive impairment on his ability to recall and articulate his experiences. The court was required to determine if the Tribunal had adequately considered all relevant evidence, including the applicant's cognitive difficulties, when assessing his claims.

The court found that the Tribunal had failed to give sufficient weight to the evidence of the applicant's significant cognitive impairment, which demonstrably affected his memory and recall. This impairment was a crucial factor that explained many of the inconsistencies the Tribunal had relied upon to find the applicant not credible. The court reiterated the principle that a tribunal must consider the impact of any identified disability on a claimant's ability to give evidence. By not adequately accounting for the applicant's cognitive impairment, the Tribunal had not properly assessed the credibility of his claims.

The court set aside the decision of the Refugee Tribunal and remitted the matter to the Tribunal to be heard and determined according to law.