MB9-05595

MB9-05595

The adult appellants are excluded under Article 1E because they either had or could obtain permanent resident status in Brazil via family reunification (status providing rights similar to nationals), their loss of status was voluntary, and they failed to prove on the balance of probabilities a credible risk of persecution or risk under s.97(1) IRPA if returned; the minor, deriving her claim from the male, likewise failed to show a serious possibility of persecution or risk.

Citation
MB9-05595
Parties
Appellant (male): XXXX XXXX; Appellant (female): XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision excluding adult appellants under Article 1E; minor appellant not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, Convention Refugee, Family Reunification Visa, Particular Social Group, Persecution, Risk Under Subsection 97(1) IRPA, Racial Discrimination, State Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Article 1 E Exclusion Convention Refugee Family Reunification Visa Particular Social Group Persecution +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (male)

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (female)

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in concluding adult appellants could obtain definitive residence via family reunification and thus be excluded under Article 1E
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in concluding the appellants do not face a real risk of persecution or risk to life/cruel and unusual treatment in Brazil
  3. 3 Whether the minor appellant demonstrated a serious possibility of persecution or risk under s.97(1) IRPA if returned to Brazil

Ratio Decidendi

The adult appellants are excluded under Article 1E because they either had or could obtain permanent resident status in Brazil via family reunification (status providing rights similar to nationals), their loss of status was voluntary, and they failed to prove on the balance of probabilities a credible risk of persecution or risk under s.97(1) IRPA if returned; the minor, deriving her claim from the male, likewise failed to show a serious possibility of persecution or risk.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision excluding adult appellants under Article 1E; minor appellant not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RAD confirms the RPD determination