MB9-07748

MB9-07748

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings after an independent review under the correctness standard, found no objective basis for the appellants' fear of FGM or of violence against the parents given uncorroborated allegations, inconsistent omissions, medical records, delay and travel, and country evidence indicating variable prevalence and available protection; therefore the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MB9-07748
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spouse (mrs. A.): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Credibility Assessment, Country Condition Evidence, State Protection, Well Founded Fear, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Protection Refugee Law Gender Based Violence Human Rights Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Credibility Assessment Country Condition Evidence State Protection +2 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse (mrs. A.)

XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellants

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RPD's adverse credibility findings were justified
  2. 2 Whether appellants face a well‑founded fear of FGM or scarification
  3. 3 Whether parents would face violence or persecution for opposing rituals

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings after an independent review under the correctness standard, found no objective basis for the appellants' fear of FGM or of violence against the parents given uncorroborated allegations, inconsistent omissions, medical records, delay and travel, and country evidence indicating variable prevalence and available protection; therefore the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated April 4, 2019 confirmed pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the IRPA