MB4-03586

MB4-03586

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the totality of evidence—multiple reavailments to Albania (at least seven), social media disclosures inconsistent with a genuine fear of death, the father's continued unharassed presence in the same locality, and the doubtful probative value of the CNR attestation given evidence of falsification—undermined the appellants' credibility and established that they are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) of IRPA.

Citation
MB4-03586
Parties
Principal Appellant / Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision (rad Confirms Rpd)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Blood Feud (kanun), Country Conditions, Standard of Review for Appellate Tribunal, Delayed Claim/reavailment, Documentary Evidence Probative Value
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Blood Feud (kanun) Country Conditions Standard of Review for Appellate Tribunal Delayed Claim/reavailment +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant / Designated Representative

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision (rad Confirms Rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants have a subjective and objective fear of persecution tied to a blood feud
  2. 2 Whether multiple returns to country of origin and social media disclosures undermine credibility
  3. 3 Proper standard and scope of review for the RAD vis-à-vis the RPD

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the totality of evidence—multiple reavailments to Albania (at least seven), social media disclosures inconsistent with a genuine fear of death, the father's continued unharassed presence in the same locality, and the doubtful probative value of the CNR attestation given evidence of falsification—undermined the appellants' credibility and established that they are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) of IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD determination confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA