MB7-00468

MB7-00468

The RAD affirmed the RPD's central credibility findings: the principal appellant's two returns to India during the period of alleged fear, her failure to claim refugee protection during her first visit to Canada, and her nearly two‑year delay in following up a police complaint sufficiently undermined her credibility to warrant rejecting the refugee claims of her and her two adult children; therefore the RPD's refusal of protection was confirmed.

Citation
MB7-00468
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Adult Child: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Immigration and Refugee Refugee Appeal Division Appeal / Appeal Heard by Rad; Determination Issued Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination, State Protection, Documentary Evidence and Probative Value, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Determination State Protection Documentary Evidence and Probative Value Standard of Review

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Adult Child

Procedural Posture

Immigration and Refugee Refugee Appeal Division Appeal / Appeal Heard by Rad; Determination Issued Confirming RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Credibility of the principal appellant and its effect on derivative claims
  2. 2 Impact of returning to country of claimed persecution on credibility
  3. 3 Delay in seeking state protection and failure to follow up police complaint

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD affirmed the RPD's central credibility findings: the principal appellant's two returns to India during the period of alleged fear, her failure to claim refugee protection during her first visit to Canada, and her nearly two‑year delay in following up a police complaint sufficiently undermined her credibility to warrant rejecting the refugee claims of her and her two adult children; therefore the RPD's refusal of protection was confirmed.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; RPD determination dated December 21, 2016, confirmed pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)