MC0-08808

MC0-08808

Although the RPD erred in not applying Guideline 4, the RAD applied Guideline 4 in its independent review and upheld the RPD's central adverse credibility findings concerning omissions and contradictions (dead body incident, police accusations, complaint against police, inconsistencies with medical note); the BBC article was admitted as new evidence but did not alter credibility or create a serious issue warranting a hearing; therefore appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or a balance of probabilities risk of torture, death, or cruel and unusual treatment, and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MC0-08808
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed — appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Gender Based Persecution, New Evidence Admission, Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness, Prospective Risk, Treatment of Minors, Country Conditions
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Credibility Assessment Gender Based Persecution New Evidence Admission Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD applied Chairperson's Guideline 4 to a claim involving alleged sexual assault and whether failure to do so was fatal
  2. 2 Whether the RPD's adverse credibility findings on central inconsistencies were justified
  3. 3 Admissibility of post-decision country information as new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA and adapted Raza criteria

Ratio Decidendi

Although the RPD erred in not applying Guideline 4, the RAD applied Guideline 4 in its independent review and upheld the RPD's central adverse credibility findings concerning omissions and contradictions (dead body incident, police accusations, complaint against police, inconsistencies with medical note); the BBC article was admitted as new evidence but did not alter credibility or create a serious issue warranting a hearing; therefore appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or a balance of probabilities risk of torture, death, or cruel and unusual treatment, and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed — appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Admit Exhibit A-1 (BBC article dated 30 September 2020) as new evidence
  • Deny request for a hearing under s.110(6) IRPA