TB8-21356

TB8-21356

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal found material and central credibility defects regarding the Male Appellant's arrest, detention and release combined with objective evidence of reavailment (multiple official border crossings and approximately ten months spent in Nigeria) that destroyed subjective fear; therefore the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or need for protection and the RPD decision was confirmed.

Citation
TB8-21356
Parties
Appellant (male): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (female): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Reavailment, Convention Refugee Determination, Protection Claim, Supporting Affidavits, Failure to Claim in Third Country
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Reavailment Convention Refugee Determination Protection Claim Supporting Affidavits +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (male)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (female)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants established the Male Appellant's detention and persecution
  2. 2 Whether appellants demonstrated subjective fear given multiple returns to Nigeria (reavailment)
  3. 3 Whether credibility findings by RPD were reasonable and central

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the Tribunal found material and central credibility defects regarding the Male Appellant's arrest, detention and release combined with objective evidence of reavailment (multiple official border crossings and approximately ten months spent in Nigeria) that destroyed subjective fear; therefore the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or need for protection and the RPD decision was confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act