MB8-11996

MB8-11996

The RAD found that the RPD reasonably concluded that material inconsistencies, contradictions and omissions in the appellants' documentary and oral evidence rebutted the presumption of credibility, and that on the admitted record the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or personal risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment; applying the correctness standard (no meaningful advantage by RPD on credibility), the RAD independently affirmed the RPD decision and dismissed the appeal.

Citation
MB8-11996
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (citizen of Haiti): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (citizen of the United States): XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility, Exclusion, Refugee Status Determination, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Exclusion Refugee Status Determination Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection +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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (citizen of Haiti)

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (citizen of the United States)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding the appellants not credible
  2. 2 Whether the appellants established a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether the RAD should set aside the RPD decision or order a de novo hearing before a different member

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found that the RPD reasonably concluded that material inconsistencies, contradictions and omissions in the appellants' documentary and oral evidence rebutted the presumption of credibility, and that on the admitted record the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or personal risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment; applying the correctness standard (no meaningful advantage by RPD on credibility), the RAD independently affirmed the RPD decision and dismissed the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division determination of April 20, 2018 confirmed that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection