Liyanagamage v. Canada ( Secretary of State )
IMM-2377-93
McKeown J.
14/12/93
3 pp.
Whether Immigration and Refugee Board failed to observe principle of natural justice or procedural fairness by not giving applicant opportunity to reply to new case law, and whether Board ignored relevant evidence applicant could not return to Colombo as Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) -- Matter of failure to give opportunity to reply to new case law dealt with on case-by-case basis until now -- In circumstances of case herein, failure contrary to procedural fairness -- Question should be reviewed by appeal court to enable court to determine if question should be dealt with on general or case-by-case basis -- Here, Board relied on F.C.A. decision in Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) v. Villafranca (1992), 99 D.L.R. (4th) 334 where Court stated burden of showing inability to avail oneself of protection of one's own state not easily satisfied -- However, two further cases clarified Villafranca -- Under unusual circumstances set out herein, contrary to procedural fairness to deny applicant right to make submissions on Villafranca -- Furthermore, on IFA, Board ignored relevant evidence -- Decision set aside and matter referred back to Refugee Division for redetermination of applicant's claim to Convention refugee status by different panel in accordance with reasons herein.