MB8-27180

MB8-27180

The appeal is dismissed because the principal appellant failed to establish his identity: key identity documents displayed serious anomalies consistent with alteration, the appellant admitted possible alteration, contradicted documentary evidence and failed to produce acceptable documents or to make reasonable efforts to obtain them despite time and representation; consequently the appellants failed to show a serious possibility of persecution or, on the balance of probabilities, risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment under ss.96-97 IRPA.

Citation
MB8-27180
Parties
Appellant (principal): XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (wife): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (son): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent (minister): Minister of Immigration
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Identity Verification, Credibility Assessment, Cessation Provisions, Persecution Nexus, Risk of Torture/death, Document Reliability
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Identity Verification Credibility Assessment Cessation Provisions Persecution Nexus +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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (principal)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (wife)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (son)

Minister of Immigration

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant established his identity
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's testimony was credible
  3. 3 Whether identity documents were reliable or altered

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the principal appellant failed to establish his identity: key identity documents displayed serious anomalies consistent with alteration, the appellant admitted possible alteration, contradicted documentary evidence and failed to produce acceptable documents or to make reasonable efforts to obtain them despite time and representation; consequently the appellants failed to show a serious possibility of persecution or, on the balance of probabilities, risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment under ss.96-97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection