TB8-14053

TB8-14053

The appeal from exclusion under Article 1F(b) is allowed because the RPD erred in its legal assessment of the criminality/exclusion issues; however the appeal against the RPD's adverse credibility finding on bisexuality is dismissed because the Appellant lost the presumption of truth through deliberate omissions of criminal history, inconsistent and misleading evidence (including a misdated injury photograph and uncorroborated allegations), unexplained delay in claiming asylum, and social media posts that undermine his account, such that he failed to establish a well‑founded fear of persecution for bisexuality.

Citation
TB8-14053
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent / Minister: Minister of Immigration
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part: exclusion finding under Article 1F(b) set aside; appeal against RPD credibility finding on bisexuality dismissed; RPD decision that the Appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection confirmed.
Legal Topics
Refugee Status Determination, Exclusion Under Article 1 F(b), Credibility Findings, Sexual Orientation (bisexuality), SOGIE Guideline Application
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Refugee Status Determination Exclusion Under Article 1 F(b) Credibility Findings Sexual Orientation (bisexuality) SOGIE Guideline Application

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister of Immigration

Respondent / Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant is excluded from refugee protection under Article 1F(b)
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant established bisexuality and a well-founded fear of persecution in Uganda
  3. 3 Whether the RPD applied the SOGIE Guideline appropriately

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal from exclusion under Article 1F(b) is allowed because the RPD erred in its legal assessment of the criminality/exclusion issues; however the appeal against the RPD's adverse credibility finding on bisexuality is dismissed because the Appellant lost the presumption of truth through deliberate omissions of criminal history, inconsistent and misleading evidence (including a misdated injury photograph and uncorroborated allegations), unexplained delay in claiming asylum, and social media posts that undermine his account, such that he failed to establish a well‑founded fear of persecution for bisexuality.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part: exclusion finding under Article 1F(b) set aside; appeal against RPD credibility finding on bisexuality dismissed; RPD decision that the Appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection confirmed.

Orders

  • Allow appeal from exclusion under Article 1F(b).
  • Dismiss appeal against the RPD's finding that the Appellant's allegation of being bisexual is not credible.