TB8-08828

TB8-08828

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found the RPD's adverse credibility findings were justified and conducted an independent correctness review: the sterilization certificate was not new and therefore inadmissible; the objective and subjective evidence did not establish a real risk from family planning authorities (likely only fines) nor that either appellant is a genuine Christian or that their church activity in Canada would be known to Chinese authorities; the domestic violence claim lacked prior disclosure and independent corroboration; accordingly the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB8-08828
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal Decision by Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility, Sur Place, Family Planning, Religious Persecution, Domestic Violence, Admissibility of New Evidence, Oral Hearing
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Sur Place Family Planning Religious Persecution Domestic Violence +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal Decision by Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding the Appellants not credible
  2. 2 Whether the female Appellant faces persecution from family planning authorities
  3. 3 Whether the male Appellant faces persecution from family planning authorities

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found the RPD's adverse credibility findings were justified and conducted an independent correctness review: the sterilization certificate was not new and therefore inadmissible; the objective and subjective evidence did not establish a real risk from family planning authorities (likely only fines) nor that either appellant is a genuine Christian or that their church activity in Canada would be known to Chinese authorities; the domestic violence claim lacked prior disclosure and independent corroboration; accordingly the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed

Orders

  • New evidence (sterilization certificate) refused as not meeting statutory criteria
  • Request for an oral hearing refused