TB7-22053

TB7-22053

The appeal is dismissed because the new documents did not satisfy s.110(4) IRPA and therefore were inadmissible, and on independent review the Appellants failed to establish identity or credibly explain lack of primary identity documents; implausible testimony about knowledge of travel documents and claims about Italian language ability, together with failure to obtain Nigerian identity documents, justified confirmation of the RPD decision that identity was not established.

Citation
TB7-22053
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Following RPD Decision Dated October 20, 2017; Request to Admit New Evidence and for an Oral Hearing; RAD Decision on August 9, 2018 Confirming RPD and Dismissing Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision dated October 20, 2017 confirmed; Appellants failed to establish identity and therefore are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility, Identity, Admissibility of Fresh Evidence, Natural Justice, Gender Related Persecution (fgm), Transit and Documentary Evidence, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Identity Admissibility of Fresh Evidence Natural Justice Gender Related Persecution (fgm) +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 4 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Following RPD Decision Dated October 20, 2017; Request to Admit New Evidence and for an Oral Hearing; RAD Decision on August 9, 2018 Confirming RPD and Dismissing Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether new evidence meets s.110(4) IRPA and is admissible on appeal
  2. 2 Whether RPD breached natural justice
  3. 3 Whether Appellants established identity and citizenship with acceptable documentation

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the new documents did not satisfy s.110(4) IRPA and therefore were inadmissible, and on independent review the Appellants failed to establish identity or credibly explain lack of primary identity documents; implausible testimony about knowledge of travel documents and claims about Italian language ability, together with failure to obtain Nigerian identity documents, justified confirmation of the RPD decision that identity was not established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision dated October 20, 2017 confirmed; Appellants failed to establish identity and therefore are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • New evidence (affidavit, school certificate, identification certificate, health cards) denied admissibility under s.110(4) IRPA
  • Request for an oral hearing denied