MC0-10152

MC0-10152

The RAD dismissed the appeal because the RPD did not err: multiple material contradictions and omissions between the appellants' written statements and testimony undermined their credibility, the appellants failed to provide evidence to explain those inconsistencies, and therefore they are not Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Citation
MC0-10152
Parties
Female Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Male Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Standard of Review

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Female Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Male Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Protection Division erred in its credibility assessment of the appellants
  2. 2 Whether contradictions and omissions in evidence undermine the refugee claim
  3. 3 Whether appellants' culture, education or ability to testify explain inconsistencies

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal because the RPD did not err: multiple material contradictions and omissions between the appellants' written statements and testimony undermined their credibility, the appellants failed to provide evidence to explain those inconsistencies, and therefore they are not Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division decision confirmed