TB4-09538

TB4-09538

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection and are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; the purported new evidence fails IRPA s.110(4) (not new, not credible or not material) and the RPD made no error of law or fact in assessing country conditions and credibility, so the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TB4-09538
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX (principal Appellant); Spouse Appellant: XXXX XXXX (spouse Appellant); Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX (minor Appellant)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division (rpd) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, State Protection, Admissibility of New Evidence, Standard of Review/hybrid Appeal
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection State Protection Admissibility of New Evidence Standard of Review/hybrid Appeal

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX (principal Appellant)

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX (spouse Appellant)

Spouse Appellant

XXXX XXXX (minor Appellant)

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division (rpd) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellants rebutted the presumption of state protection
  2. 2 Whether documents tendered on appeal meet IRPA s.110(4) and are admissible as new evidence
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred in its assessment of country conditions of Ukraine

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection and are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; the purported new evidence fails IRPA s.110(4) (not new, not credible or not material) and the RPD made no error of law or fact in assessing country conditions and credibility, so the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • RAD confirms RPD decision rejecting the Appellants as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  • No new hearing ordered