MB9-15388

MB9-15388

The RAD admitted the appellant's supplementary written observations but refused the psychological report because it did not meet s.110(4) requirements and was not probative; after reviewing the record on a correctness standard the RAD found the RPD's credibility findings and factual conclusions were not in error and that the appellants failed to establish a reasonable or serious fear of persecution or other protection risks if returned to Algeria, therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MB9-15388
Parties
Appellants: XXXX XXXX and minor children
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (review of RPD Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admission of New Evidence, Standard of Review, Risk of Persecution, Psychological Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Admission of New Evidence Standard of Review Risk of Persecution Psychological Evidence

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX and minor children

Appellants

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (review of RPD Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether supplementary written submissions and a psychological report should be admitted under RAD Rules
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility findings
  3. 3 Whether the appellants established a reasonable or serious fear of persecution, risk to life, danger of torture or risk of cruel and unusual treatment if returned to Algeria

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD admitted the appellant's supplementary written observations but refused the psychological report because it did not meet s.110(4) requirements and was not probative; after reviewing the record on a correctness standard the RAD found the RPD's credibility findings and factual conclusions were not in error and that the appellants failed to establish a reasonable or serious fear of persecution or other protection risks if returned to Algeria, therefore the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RPD decision of June 14, 2019, is confirmed