Application allowed. The Board’s finding that the claimant’s story was “too fortuitous to be true” was not reasonable The fact that a summons was not left for the claimant was corroborated by the documentation which indicates that the practice of issuing summons is inconsistent. The Board’s finding that the claimant could practise at a state sanctioned church was inconsistent with the claimant’s belief that the state church puts the state before God. The Board’s finding that the applicant had religious freedom in Fujian was inconsistent with documentation that showed unregistered churches were illegal and members were often harassed.

Counsel for Applicant: Shelley Levine

Read complete judgement