TB8-08484

TB8-08484

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to establish his identity on a balance of probabilities and the two proffered items of purported new evidence were inadmissible (the driver's licence was not credible on its face due to material inconsistencies and the affidavit was not new or reasonably unavailable); accordingly no statutory basis existed to admit new evidence or to hold an oral hearing, and the RPD decision was correctly affirmed.

Citation
TB8-08484
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent / Minister: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Admissibility of New Evidence and Merits; Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated March 15, 2018 confirmed; appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility and Identity, Admission of New Evidence, Oral Hearing Requests, Standard of Proof, Statutory Interpretation of IRPA Ss.110 and 111, RAD Rules (rule 29)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility and Identity Admission of New Evidence Oral Hearing Requests Standard of Proof Statutory Interpretation of IRPA Ss.110 and 111 +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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent / Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Admissibility of New Evidence and Merits; Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the two items of purported new evidence meet the requirements of s.110(4) IRPA and Rule 29 to be admitted on appeal
  2. 2 Whether the new evidence is credible and relevant to resolve the central issue of identity and credibility
  3. 3 Whether an oral hearing is required under s.110(6) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the appellant failed to establish his identity on a balance of probabilities and the two proffered items of purported new evidence were inadmissible (the driver's licence was not credible on its face due to material inconsistencies and the affidavit was not new or reasonably unavailable); accordingly no statutory basis existed to admit new evidence or to hold an oral hearing, and the RPD decision was correctly affirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated March 15, 2018 confirmed; appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed (March 15, 2018); no further proceedings ordered by RAD