MB7-26093

MB7-26093

The RPD was justified in finding the omission of the attempted extortion from the BoC undermined credibility; even accepting extortion attempts occurred, they reflected generalized criminal insecurity in Haiti rather than a personalized risk; therefore the Appellants failed to establish they are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection and the RPD decision is confirmed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Citation
MB7-26093
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / RAD Final Decision Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility, Risk Assessment, Natural Justice, Personalized Risk, Convention Refugee Determination
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Risk Assessment Natural Justice Personalized Risk Convention Refugee Determination

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / RAD Final Decision Confirming RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RPD erred in credibility findings due to omissions in the Basis of Claim (BoC)
  2. 2 Whether Appellants established nexus to a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether Appellants face a personalized risk beyond the general criminality in Haiti

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD was justified in finding the omission of the attempted extortion from the BoC undermined credibility; even accepting extortion attempts occurred, they reflected generalized criminal insecurity in Haiti rather than a personalized risk; therefore the Appellants failed to establish they are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection and the RPD decision is confirmed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(a): Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection