MB9-08064

MB9-08064

The RAD confirmed the RPD: Article 1E applies because the principal appellant can return to Brazil and reclaim permanent resident status and would enjoy substantially similar rights, and she failed to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution; consequently the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 IRPA.

Citation
MB9-08064
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (minor, Brazilian Citizen): XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (minor, United States Citizen): XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision / Reasons for Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed under section 111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, Permanent Residence, Credibility Assessment, Risk Assessment (section 97 Irpa), Convention Refugee Determination, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Article 1 E Exclusion Permanent Residence Credibility Assessment Risk Assessment (section 97 Irpa) Convention Refugee Determination +1 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 7 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (minor, Brazilian Citizen)

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (minor, United States Citizen)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision / Reasons for Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Article 1E exclusion applies because the principal appellant can return to Brazil and reclaim permanent resident status
  2. 2 Whether the principal appellant would enjoy rights and responsibilities substantially similar to Brazilian nationals
  3. 3 Whether there is a serious possibility of persecution in Brazil (or Haiti/US for minors) under section 97 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: Article 1E applies because the principal appellant can return to Brazil and reclaim permanent resident status and would enjoy substantially similar rights, and she failed to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution; consequently the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed under section 111(1)(a) IRPA

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division determination of March 21, 2019 confirmed