TB5-10406

TB5-10406

The RAD confirmed the RPD: no new evidence was before the RAD to justify an oral hearing; material contradictions between testimony and claim documents (BoC, IMM-5669), lack of corroboration, and unexplained delay undermined credibility; on the totality of evidence appellants failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or risk under s.97(1)(b) or to establish Convention refugee status, so the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TB5-10406
Parties
Appellant (principal): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (child): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (child): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Following Refugee Protection Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms decision of the RPD
Legal Topics
Credibility, Well Founded Fear, Section 97 Analysis, Oral Hearing Application, Delay in Filing
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Well Founded Fear Section 97 Analysis Oral Hearing Application Delay in Filing

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (principal)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (child)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (child)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Following Refugee Protection Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether RPD erred in credibility findings
  2. 2 whether appellants face a serious possibility of persecution or risk under s.97(1)(b) IRPA
  3. 3 whether RAD should hold an oral hearing under s.110 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: no new evidence was before the RAD to justify an oral hearing; material contradictions between testimony and claim documents (BoC, IMM-5669), lack of corroboration, and unexplained delay undermined credibility; on the totality of evidence appellants failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or risk under s.97(1)(b) or to establish Convention refugee status, so the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms decision of the RPD

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and decision of Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA