TB9-31760

TB9-31760

The appeal is dismissed because the Appellants failed to meet the evidentiary standards: the purported new Police Report is not admissible as new credible evidence, the testimonial accounts contain significant, central contradictions and omissions, and documentary corroboration is flawed or inconsistent; cumulatively the evidence does not meet the threshold for a Convention refugee under s.96 or for a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA, so the RPD decision is confirmed.

Citation
TB9-31760
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Admissibility of New Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Corroboration
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Admissibility of New Evidence Credibility Assessment +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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellants are Convention refugees under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the Appellants are persons in need of protection under section 97 of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the second Police Report is admissible as new evidence under section 110(4) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the Appellants failed to meet the evidentiary standards: the purported new Police Report is not admissible as new credible evidence, the testimonial accounts contain significant, central contradictions and omissions, and documentary corroboration is flawed or inconsistent; cumulatively the evidence does not meet the threshold for a Convention refugee under s.96 or for a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA, so the RPD decision is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection