When the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) rejects a refugee claim, the claimant’s most important next step is usually an appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD). The RAD is a separate division of the Immigration and Refugee Board that reviews RPD decisions on their merits. It can confirm the rejection, substitute its own decision granting protection, or send the case back to the RPD for a new hearing. This guide explains the 2026 RAD appeal process, the strict 15-day filing deadline, the test for new evidence, and the limited circumstances in which the RAD will hold an oral hearing.
Who can appeal to the RAD?
Most claimants whose refugee claims are rejected by the RPD have a right of appeal to the RAD under section 110 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). However, certain categories of claimants are excluded from the RAD appeal right, including persons whose claims were referred to the RPD before the RAD came into operation in December 2012, persons subject to a Designated Country of Origin finding (currently no countries are designated, but the framework remains), persons whose claims were found to have no credible basis or to be manifestly unfounded, and persons who arrived as part of a designated irregular arrival. The Minister of Public Safety may also appeal an RPD decision that grants protection.
The 15-day filing deadline
A claimant must file a Notice of Appeal to the RAD within 15 days of receiving the RPD’s written decision. This deadline is jurisdictional and virtually impossible to extend. The RAD has held repeatedly that a late-filed appeal cannot be perfected, and the Federal Court has upheld this interpretation. Because the RPD decision is deemed received seven days after it is sent by mail (or on the date it is picked up in person or received electronically), the effective window for action is very short. Claimants should retain counsel immediately upon receiving a negative RPD decision, if they have not already done so.
After filing the Notice of Appeal, the claimant has 30 days to file the Appellant’s Record, which includes a memorandum of argument setting out the errors the RPD allegedly made. The memorandum must identify the specific findings of fact, law, or mixed fact and law that the claimant challenges, and explain why each finding was wrong.
Standard of review
The RAD reviews RPD decisions on a correctness standard for questions of law and a reasonableness standard for questions of fact, following the framework established by the Federal Court of Appeal in Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Huruglica. In practice, this means the RAD conducts its own independent assessment of the evidence and may reach a different conclusion from the RPD on factual questions, but it must explain why the RPD’s factual findings were wrong. On legal questions the RAD simply applies the correct legal test.
New evidence on appeal
Section 110(4) of the IRPA permits the RAD to admit new evidence that arose after the RPD rejection, or that was not reasonably available at the time of the RPD hearing, or that the claimant could not reasonably have been expected to present at the RPD hearing. The evidence must also be credible, relevant, and material. The new-evidence threshold is strict: evidence that was available but simply not submitted to the RPD will generally be excluded. The most common type of new evidence admitted on appeal is post-decision country-condition reports showing a worsening of conditions in the claimant’s home country.
Oral hearings at the RAD
The RAD generally decides appeals on the written record, without an oral hearing. Under section 110(6), the RAD may hold a hearing only if the appeal raises a question of credibility that is central to the decision, there is new evidence that raises a serious issue of credibility, and the evidence, taken together with the existing record, could justify allowing or rejecting the claim. In practice, oral hearings at the RAD are rare. Most appeals are decided on the basis of the memorandum, the RPD record, and any admitted new evidence.
Possible outcomes
The RAD may confirm the RPD’s rejection, in which case the claimant’s removal order becomes enforceable. It may set aside the rejection and substitute a determination that the claimant is a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection, which grants protected-person status. Or it may refer the claim back to the RPD for a new determination, with or without directions, when it considers that the RPD made an error that cannot be corrected on the existing record. A referral back to the RPD means a second hearing before a different RPD member.
After the RAD: judicial review
If the RAD dismisses the appeal, the claimant may apply for leave and judicial review at the Federal Court within 15 days. Leave is a threshold requirement: the claimant must persuade a judge that the application raises a fairly arguable case. If leave is granted, the matter proceeds to a full hearing on judicial review, where the Court assesses whether the RAD decision was reasonable. The Federal Court cannot substitute its own assessment of the refugee claim; it can only send the case back to the RAD or RPD for redetermination if the decision was unreasonable or procedurally unfair.
Frequently asked questions
How long do I have to file a RAD appeal?
You must file the Notice of Appeal within 15 days of receiving the RPD decision. This deadline is strict and cannot be extended. The Appellant’s Record, including the memorandum of argument, must be filed within 30 days of filing the appeal.
Can I submit new evidence to the RAD?
Yes, but only if the evidence arose after the RPD decision, was not reasonably available at the time of the RPD hearing, or could not reasonably have been expected to be presented at the hearing. The evidence must also be credible, relevant, and material to the claim.
Will the RAD hold an oral hearing?
Oral hearings at the RAD are rare. The RAD will hold a hearing only where credibility is central to the decision, new evidence raises a serious credibility issue, and the evidence could justify a different outcome. Most appeals are decided on the written record.
What happens if the RAD rejects my appeal?
You may apply for leave and judicial review at the Federal Court within 15 days. If the Court finds the RAD decision unreasonable or procedurally unfair, it will send the case back for redetermination. You may also become eligible for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment before removal.
Can the Minister appeal an RPD decision that accepted my claim?
Yes. The Minister of Public Safety has the right to appeal an RPD decision granting refugee protection. If the Minister appeals, the claimant becomes the respondent and must defend the RPD decision before the RAD.
Should I get a lawyer for a RAD appeal?
Strongly recommended. RAD appeals require detailed legal memoranda, knowledge of the standard of review, and familiarity with the new-evidence rules. The stakes are extremely high, as a dismissed appeal typically leads to removal. Legal aid may cover RAD appeals depending on the province.
This guide provides general information only and is not legal advice. For advice on your RAD appeal, please contact BridgePoint Law Professional Corporation.