TB9-20977

TB9-20977

The appeals are dismissed because an independent review agrees with the RPD that credibility was the determinative issue; the Principal Appellant's core allegations (risk of FGM to the child, that the husband's family was pursuing them, and that the Principal Appellant is bisexual) were not credibly established due to striking similarities with a relative's BOC, discrepancies in the psychologist's report, lack of credible corroboration and vague testimony; those credibility findings defeat claims under sections 96 and 97 IRPA and preclude application of subsection 108(4).

Citation
TB9-20977
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (daughter): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (son): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation, Sexual Orientation, Credibility Findings, Procedural Fairness, Risk Assessment Under Section 97 IRPA, Exceptional Circumstances Under Section 108(4) IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Female Genital Mutilation Sexual Orientation Credibility Findings Procedural Fairness Risk Assessment Under Section 97 IRPA +1 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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (daughter)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (son)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD drew unreasonable conclusions in its credibility assessment
  2. 2 Whether the RPD breached procedural fairness by failing to conduct a section 97 IRPA analysis
  3. 3 Whether there are compelling reasons under section 108(4) IRPA to grant protection despite adverse credibility findings

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals are dismissed because an independent review agrees with the RPD that credibility was the determinative issue; the Principal Appellant's core allegations (risk of FGM to the child, that the husband's family was pursuing them, and that the Principal Appellant is bisexual) were not credibly established due to striking similarities with a relative's BOC, discrepancies in the psychologist's report, lack of credible corroboration and vague testimony; those credibility findings defeat claims under sections 96 and 97 IRPA and preclude application of subsection 108(4).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • The appeals are dismissed; the decision of the Refugee Protection Division is confirmed that the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection (paragraph 111(1)(a) of IRPA).