TB8-29354

TB8-29354

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the appellants failed to demonstrate ongoing risk from the FARC (no reliable contact or threats since 2014) and failed to seek asylum during a 2.5-year stay in the United States, permitting an adverse inference as to subjective fear; the new evidence did not alter the outcome and did not warrant a new hearing, therefore they are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB8-29354
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Final Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Asylum Claim in First Safe Country, State Protection, Adverse Inference for Failure to Seek Asylum
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Asylum Claim in First Safe Country State Protection Adverse Inference for Failure to Seek Asylum

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Final Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 credibility of appellant's account of assault and threats
  2. 2 whether RPD ignored or misconstrued evidence
  3. 3 alleged unreasonable preconceptions by the RPD

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the appellants failed to demonstrate ongoing risk from the FARC (no reliable contact or threats since 2014) and failed to seek asylum during a 2.5-year stay in the United States, permitting an adverse inference as to subjective fear; the new evidence did not alter the outcome and did not warrant a new hearing, therefore they are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RAD confirms RPD determination pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of IRPA