TC0-11847

TC0-11847

The appeal is dismissed because, on independent review of the record, the Refugee Protection Division reasonably found the appellants' core allegations not credible and there was insufficient probative corroborative evidence to establish the existence, profile and capacity of the alleged agents of persecution or to meet the tests under sections 96 or 97 IRPA; procedural fairness and guideline obligations were satisfied and no bias was demonstrated.

Citation
TC0-11847
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (husband): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellants (three Children, One US Citizen): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent / Counsel for the Minister: Minister (represented); Panel / Decision‑maker: Jillan Sadek
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal From Refugee Protection Division Decision on Credibility; Request for Oral Hearing Denied; Final Decision on Merits (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Corroborative Evidence, Bias / Reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Gender Guidelines and Member Code of Conduct, Section 96 and 97 IRPA Risk Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination, Request for Oral Hearing Under IRPA S.110
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Procedural Fairness Credibility Findings Corroborative Evidence Bias / Reasonable Apprehension of Bias Gender Guidelines and Member Code of Conduct +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (husband)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellants (three Children, One US Citizen)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister (represented)

Respondent / Counsel for the Minister

Jillan Sadek

Panel / Decision‑maker

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal From Refugee Protection Division Decision on Credibility; Request for Oral Hearing Denied; Final Decision on Merits (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding the appellants not credible
  2. 2 Whether the RPD exhibited bias or breached the Member Code of Conduct or Gender Guidelines
  3. 3 Whether the RPD wrongly required corroborative evidence contrary to established principles

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because, on independent review of the record, the Refugee Protection Division reasonably found the appellants' core allegations not credible and there was insufficient probative corroborative evidence to establish the existence, profile and capacity of the alleged agents of persecution or to meet the tests under sections 96 or 97 IRPA; procedural fairness and guideline obligations were satisfied and no bias was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Request for an oral hearing under IRPA denied (no new evidence admitted)
  • Appeal dismissed and Refugee Protection Division decision that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection is confirmed