TB4-12469

TB4-12469

RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings and dismissal because, on balance of probabilities and in light of country documentation, the Appellant's account was implausible and uncorroborated: multiple alleged PSB visits with no summons or warrant, the Appellant's ability to exit China on valid passports and visas inconsistent with being pursued, and lack of independent documentary or photographic corroboration justified the RPD's rejection of the refugee and protection claims.

Citation
TB4-12469
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 March 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Decision
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RPD determination confirmed under section 111(1)(a) of the IRPA
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Persecution, State Protection, Exit Controls, Corroboration, Administrative Review Standard
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Credibility Assessment Persecution State Protection Exit Controls Corroboration Administrative Review Standard

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD's adverse credibility findings were reasonable
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant was pursued by the Public Security Bureau (PSB)
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant's home was expropriated and demolished as alleged

Ratio Decidendi

RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings and dismissal because, on balance of probabilities and in light of country documentation, the Appellant's account was implausible and uncorroborated: multiple alleged PSB visits with no summons or warrant, the Appellant's ability to exit China on valid passports and visas inconsistent with being pursued, and lack of independent documentary or photographic corroboration justified the RPD's rejection of the refugee and protection claims.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RPD determination confirmed under section 111(1)(a) of the IRPA

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed and Refugee Protection Division decision confirmed