MC0-08610

MC0-08610

Because the appellants held Brazilian permanent resident status conferring rights substantially similar to nationals, the RAD applied Zeng and the MB8-00025 guide, considered alleged risks in Brazil and found the evidence established only generalized criminality and discrimination that did not meet the threshold of persecution or a risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment; minors had no objective basis to fear in their countries of citizenship; accordingly the adult appellants are excluded under Article 1E and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MC0-08610
Parties
Male Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Female Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (brazil): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (united States): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, Convention Refugee Status, Credibility Assessment, Safe Third Country/third Country of Residence Analysis, Discrimination Vs. Persecution, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Protection Refugee Law International Human Rights Law Article 1 E Exclusion Convention Refugee Status Credibility Assessment Safe Third Country/third Country of Residence Analysis Discrimination Vs. Persecution +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Male Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Female Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (brazil)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (united States)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adult appellants are excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E of the 1951 Refugee Convention
  2. 2 Whether minor appellants have an objective basis for fear in their countries of citizenship
  3. 3 Whether the discrimination and criminality alleged in Brazil amount to persecution

Ratio Decidendi

Because the appellants held Brazilian permanent resident status conferring rights substantially similar to nationals, the RAD applied Zeng and the MB8-00025 guide, considered alleged risks in Brazil and found the evidence established only generalized criminality and discrimination that did not meet the threshold of persecution or a risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment; minors had no objective basis to fear in their countries of citizenship; accordingly the adult appellants are excluded under Article 1E and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Adult appellants excluded under Article 1E of the 1951 Refugee Convention pursuant to s.98 IRPA