MB9-29757

MB9-29757

The appellant is excluded under Article 1E and section 98 IRPA because he previously held Brazilian permanent resident status that conferred rights substantially similar to nationals, but he voluntarily lost that status by remaining outside Brazil for over two years and cannot reasonably justify the absence or reacquire status; his testimony was found non‑credible and corroborating documents were given no probative value, and he therefore failed to establish a well‑founded fear of persecution or a risk in Brazil or Haiti, so the RPD decision to exclude and deny protection is within a range of reasonable outcomes and is confirmed.

Citation
MB9-29757
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed; appellant excluded from Canada's protection under Article 1E of the Refugee Convention and section 98 of the IRPA
Legal Topics
Exclusion Under Article 1 E of the Refugee Convention, Permanent Resident Status of Third Country, Credibility Assessment, Procedural Fairness, Zeng Factors, Probative Value of Documentary Evidence, Asylum Shopping, Canada's International Obligations
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law International Law Exclusion Under Article 1 E of the Refugee Convention Permanent Resident Status of Third Country Credibility Assessment Procedural Fairness +4 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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Who Is Subject of the Appeal

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is excluded from protection under Article 1E of the Refugee Convention and section 98 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether appellant retained or lost Brazilian permanent resident status and whether loss was voluntary
  3. 3 Whether appellant can reacquire Brazilian status or justify absence

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant is excluded under Article 1E and section 98 IRPA because he previously held Brazilian permanent resident status that conferred rights substantially similar to nationals, but he voluntarily lost that status by remaining outside Brazil for over two years and cannot reasonably justify the absence or reacquire status; his testimony was found non‑credible and corroborating documents were given no probative value, and he therefore failed to establish a well‑founded fear of persecution or a risk in Brazil or Haiti, so the RPD decision to exclude and deny protection is within a range of reasonable outcomes and is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed; appellant excluded from Canada's protection under Article 1E of the Refugee Convention and section 98 of the IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RPD determination that the appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection is confirmed