MB9-23131

MB9-23131

The appeal is dismissed because the Refugee Protection Division's adverse credibility findings regarding the alleged incidents were reasonable; the contradictions between the Basis of Claim and testimony undermine the appellant's account of harm; the incidents did not amount to persecution under section 96 IRPA; and the appellant failed to establish, on balance of probabilities, a serious possibility of persecution or a risk under subsection 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
MB9-23131
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: Me Jean-Pierre Chamoun; Panel Member / Tribunal: Me Anne-Thierrie Tétreault
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Persecution, Sexual Orientation, Risk Assessment, Convention Refugee, Protection Under Section 97(1) IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Protection Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Persecution Sexual Orientation Risk Assessment Convention Refugee +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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Me Jean-Pierre Chamoun

Counsel for the Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Me Anne-Thierrie Tétreault

Panel Member / Tribunal

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's testimony and documentary evidence are credible

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the Refugee Protection Division's adverse credibility findings regarding the alleged incidents were reasonable; the contradictions between the Basis of Claim and testimony undermine the appellant's account of harm; the incidents did not amount to persecution under section 96 IRPA; and the appellant failed to establish, on balance of probabilities, a serious possibility of persecution or a risk under subsection 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division decision confirmed