TB8-05053

TB8-05053

The RAD affirmed the RPD because the Appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection in Hungary: they provided no clear and convincing evidence that the state could not protect them, failed to pursue available state remedies or offer compelling reasons for not reporting incidents, and the RPD's documentary and credibility analysis was reasonable and thorough.

Citation
TB8-05053
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX; Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Final Decision (appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
State Protection, Roma Discrimination, Burden of Proof, Credibility, Chairperson Guidelines
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law State Protection Roma Discrimination Burden of Proof Credibility +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 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Final Decision (appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellants rebutted the presumption of state protection in Hungary
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred by failing to apply Chairperson Guidelines 4 regarding gender-related persecution
  3. 3 Whether the Appellants' facts amount to persecution or establish a well-founded fear going forward

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD affirmed the RPD because the Appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection in Hungary: they provided no clear and convincing evidence that the state could not protect them, failed to pursue available state remedies or offer compelling reasons for not reporting incidents, and the RPD's documentary and credibility analysis was reasonable and thorough.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • RAD confirms the determination of the RPD that the Appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  • Appeal dismissed