TB9-14010

TB9-14010

Fresh post‑RPD evidence (affidavit and psychological report) is admissible but does not raise a serious credibility issue or outweigh multiple material inconsistencies, omissions and evolving testimony that rebut the appellants' presumption of truthfulness; country evidence does not show a serious possibility of persecution for their residual profiles; therefore the RPD's refusal of refugee protection was correct and the appeal is dismissed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Citation
TB9-14010
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal: Dumoluhle Siziba; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX; Decision Maker (rad Member): Colin Anderson; Counsel for the Minister: N/A
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Dismissal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; appellants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Procedural Fairness, Admissibility of Fresh Evidence, Convention Refugee Determination, Residual Risk Assessment, Vulnerable Persons Accommodation
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Procedural Fairness Admissibility of Fresh Evidence Convention Refugee Determination Residual Risk Assessment +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Dumoluhle Siziba

Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal

XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Colin Anderson

Decision Maker (rad Member)

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of post‑RPD evidence and weight to be given
  2. 2 Whether RPD hearing was procedurally unfair due to trauma
  3. 3 Whether credibility findings of RPD are supported

Ratio Decidendi

Fresh post‑RPD evidence (affidavit and psychological report) is admissible but does not raise a serious credibility issue or outweigh multiple material inconsistencies, omissions and evolving testimony that rebut the appellants' presumption of truthfulness; country evidence does not show a serious possibility of persecution for their residual profiles; therefore the RPD's refusal of refugee protection was correct and the appeal is dismissed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; appellants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed pursuant to Immigration and Refugee Protection Act s.111(1)(a)