TC2-10249

TC2-10249

The RAD confirms the RPD: material inconsistencies, omissions and implausible re‑availments by the Principal Appellant, together with documentary evidence lacking independent corroborative weight and failure to pursue significant corroboration, justified rejecting her credibility; therefore the appellants failed to prove they are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection under IRPA sections 96 and 97 and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TC2-10249
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division (rpd) Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Re‑availment, Corroboration, Convention Refugee Determination, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Re‑availment Corroboration Convention Refugee Determination 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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division (rpd) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RPD erred in credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether reavailments defeat subjective fear and credibility
  3. 3 Whether RPD improperly required or discounted corroborative documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirms the RPD: material inconsistencies, omissions and implausible re‑availments by the Principal Appellant, together with documentary evidence lacking independent corroborative weight and failure to pursue significant corroboration, justified rejecting her credibility; therefore the appellants failed to prove they are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection under IRPA sections 96 and 97 and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of Refugee Protection Division dated April 4, 2022 confirmed