TB9-07203

TB9-07203

The appeal is dismissed because the principal appellant's credibility was significantly undermined by her conduct and inconsistencies (failure to flee at the first opportunity, husband's failure to obtain a US visa and continued residence in the family home, failure to seek asylum in the USA), and the documentary evidence did not overcome those adverse credibility findings; therefore the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Citation
TB9-07203
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (female): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (male): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA s.111(1)(a).
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Female Genital Mutilation/cutting, Failure to Seek Protection in Transit Country, Standard of Proof (balance of Probabilities)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Credibility Assessment Female Genital Mutilation/cutting Failure to Seek Protection in Transit Country Standard of Proof (balance of Probabilities)

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (female)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (male)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the principal appellant was credible
  2. 2 Whether appellants fled at the first reasonable opportunity
  3. 3 Whether failure to seek asylum in the USA undermines the claim

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the principal appellant's credibility was significantly undermined by her conduct and inconsistencies (failure to flee at the first opportunity, husband's failure to obtain a US visa and continued residence in the family home, failure to seek asylum in the USA), and the documentary evidence did not overcome those adverse credibility findings; therefore the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed and the decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated February 13, 2019 is confirmed.