TB7-20081

TB7-20081

The RPD's adverse credibility findings were reasonable and supported by objective inconsistencies (discrepancies in membership card and letter vs NDP samples, implausible explanations, lack of corroboration, significant delay in seeking protection and failure to seek asylum in the US); there was no evidence of bias; therefore the RPD correctly rejected the claim and RAD confirms that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB7-20081
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX; Spouse/appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division (rpd)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Document Authenticity, Political Membership Proof, Bias Allegation, Standard of Review, Delay in Seeking Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Document Authenticity Political Membership Proof Bias Allegation Standard of Review +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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX

Spouse/appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division (rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings regarding the principal appellant's political profile and allegations of detention and abuse
  2. 2 Whether the APFP membership card and letter are authentic and probative
  3. 3 Whether other documents (email, medical note, psychotherapist report) should be given weight after a negative credibility finding

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's adverse credibility findings were reasonable and supported by objective inconsistencies (discrepancies in membership card and letter vs NDP samples, implausible explanations, lack of corroboration, significant delay in seeking protection and failure to seek asylum in the US); there was no evidence of bias; therefore the RPD correctly rejected the claim and RAD confirms that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the decision of the RPD is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.