VB8-07076

VB8-07076

Appeal dismissed because appellants did not provide sufficient credible evidence of a personalized risk of persecution or a s.97 risk; key credibility findings (notably the PA's documented annual returns to Guatemala and inconsistencies about the father's death and mother's injuries) were determinative, and new evidence admitted in part did not change the outcome; the RPD typographical error was not substantive.

Citation
VB8-07076
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Division Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection (s.97), Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence (rule 29), Admissibility Under S.110(4) of IRPA, Country Conditions/gang Violence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection (s.97) Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence (rule 29) +2 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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Division Appeal / Final Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether appellants face a s.97 risk (person in need of protection)
  3. 3 Whether new evidence should be admitted under Rule 29

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal dismissed because appellants did not provide sufficient credible evidence of a personalized risk of persecution or a s.97 risk; key credibility findings (notably the PA's documented annual returns to Guatemala and inconsistencies about the father's death and mother's injuries) were determinative, and new evidence admitted in part did not change the outcome; the RPD typographical error was not substantive.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed