VB4-00395

VB4-00395

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the three older appellants could, on the balance of probabilities, obtain Guyanese citizenship or otherwise return to Guyana using valid visas; the incidents alleged (kidnapping, robberies, vandalism, bullying) amount to generalized criminality or discrimination not persecution on a Convention ground; the proffered documentary evidence was reasonably available and inadmissible under s.110(4); therefore appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and their appeals are dismissed.

Citation
VB4-00395
Parties
Principal Claimant (mother): XXXX XXXX; Associate Claimant (father): XXXX XXXX; Eldest Daughter: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Younger Daughter: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Son: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Immigration — Refugee Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Confirming Refugee Protection Division Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Status (s.96 Irpa), Person in Need of Protection (s.97 Irpa), Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) Irpa), State Protection and Alternative Nationality, Standard of Review — Reasonableness, Proof of Foreign Law
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Status (s.96 Irpa) Person in Need of Protection (s.97 Irpa) Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) Irpa) State Protection and Alternative Nationality Standard of Review — Reasonableness +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant (mother)

XXXX XXXX

Associate Claimant (father)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Eldest Daughter

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Younger Daughter

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Son

Procedural Posture

Immigration — Refugee Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Confirming Refugee Protection Division Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether documents proffered at RAD satisfy s.110(4) as new or not reasonably available
  2. 2 Whether appellants can obtain Guyanese citizenship and thus are not stateless for protection purposes
  3. 3 Whether appellants have subjective fear of persecution in Guyana

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the three older appellants could, on the balance of probabilities, obtain Guyanese citizenship or otherwise return to Guyana using valid visas; the incidents alleged (kidnapping, robberies, vandalism, bullying) amount to generalized criminality or discrimination not persecution on a Convention ground; the proffered documentary evidence was reasonably available and inadmissible under s.110(4); therefore appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and their appeals are dismissed.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Appeals rejected; RPD decision of January 14, 2014 confirmed by RAD on May 20, 2014