TB9-09177

TB9-09177

The RAD confirms the RPD: the Minister established prima facie that the Associate Appellant had U.S. permanent resident status and the Associate Appellant failed to prove he lost that status, warranting exclusion under Article 1E; the RPD reasonably found the Principal Appellant's allegations not credible based on inconsistent evidence and behaviour incompatible with claimed fear; the minors had no established risk — appeals dismissed.

Citation
TB9-09177
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Dismissal)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Status, Burden of Proof, Protection Claims
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Article 1 E Exclusion Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Status Burden of Proof Protection Claims

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellants

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Associate Appellant is excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E due to U.S. permanent resident status
  2. 2 Whether the Principal Appellant's allegations are credible
  3. 3 Whether the minor appellants face a real risk in the United States

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirms the RPD: the Minister established prima facie that the Associate Appellant had U.S. permanent resident status and the Associate Appellant failed to prove he lost that status, warranting exclusion under Article 1E; the RPD reasonably found the Principal Appellant's allegations not credible based on inconsistent evidence and behaviour incompatible with claimed fear; the minors had no established risk — appeals dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed and decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed; Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act