MB9-27032

MB9-27032

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings: the principal Appellant failed to establish her sexual orientation on a balance of probabilities due to material omissions and inconsistencies between her testimony and her Basis of Claim (notably omission of a long-term same-sex partner, key incidents, and details of involvement in LGBT community), and her abandonment of a scheduled U.S. immigration hearing undermined any asserted subjective fear; the associate Appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or other protection-eligible risk in the United States; family unity and best interests arguments do not alter these legal thresholds, therefore the appeal...

Citation
MB9-27032
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Minister: S.O.
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division From Refugee Protection Division Decision / Decision on Appeal (no New Evidence, No RAD Hearing Requested)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed that the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Sexual Orientation (sogie), Convention Refugee Definition, Persons in Need of Protection, Family Unity, Best Interests of the Child, Abandonment of Asylum Proceedings
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Credibility Assessment Sexual Orientation (sogie) Convention Refugee Definition Persons in Need of Protection +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

S.O.

Counsel for the Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division From Refugee Protection Division Decision / Decision on Appeal (no New Evidence, No RAD Hearing Requested)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility assessment regarding the principal Appellant's claimed sexual orientation and history
  2. 2 Whether the principal Appellant established a subjective fear of persecution
  3. 3 Whether the associate Appellants established a claim against their country of citizenship (United States)

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings: the principal Appellant failed to establish her sexual orientation on a balance of probabilities due to material omissions and inconsistencies between her testimony and her Basis of Claim (notably omission of a long-term same-sex partner, key incidents, and details of involvement in LGBT community), and her abandonment of a scheduled U.S. immigration hearing undermined any asserted subjective fear; the associate Appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or other protection-eligible risk in the United States; family unity and best interests arguments do not alter these legal thresholds, therefore the appeal...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed that the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated October 24, 2019 affirmed