TB7-02734

TB7-02734

Applying the correctness standard, the RAD found no evidence that the Minor would face persecution or serious harm in the United States; the adult Appellants' new documents were not admissible because they related to events known before the RPD decision and were reasonably available; the remaining documentary evidence did not establish that the Principal Appellant was being actively sought or faced a real risk in Ghana; humanitarian relief is outside RAD's remedial scope; therefore the RAD confirmed the RPD's decision that the appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB7-02734
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad Determination)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110 Irpa), Standard of Review (correctness), Humanitarian and Compassionate Considerations, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Persecution for Political Opinion/sexual Orientation
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110 Irpa) Standard of Review (correctness) +3 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Minor Appellant has a well-founded fear of persecution or faces serious harm in the United States
  2. 2 Whether the adult Appellants face persecution or risk to life on return to Ghana for alleged pro-gay comments
  3. 3 Whether the documents proffered constitute new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA and are admissible

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the correctness standard, the RAD found no evidence that the Minor would face persecution or serious harm in the United States; the adult Appellants' new documents were not admissible because they related to events known before the RPD decision and were reasonably available; the remaining documentary evidence did not establish that the Principal Appellant was being actively sought or faced a real risk in Ghana; humanitarian relief is outside RAD's remedial scope; therefore the RAD confirmed the RPD's decision that the appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated November 25, 2016 is confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA