MB9-03995

MB9-03995

The RPD's adverse credibility findings were justified by multiple, material contradictions between testimony and documentary evidence (including passport stamps and inconsistent travel history), implausible conduct and inadequate explanations for delays and actions; those credibility findings supported the conclusion that appellants did not meet the definitions in ss.96-97 IRPA, and the RAD therefore dismissed the appeal and confirmed the RPD decision.

Citation
MB9-03995
Parties
Appellant Principal: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Spouse: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Child: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Child: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (rad) / Appeal Heard and Decided by Refugee Appeal Division; Decision on Merits Confirming RPD
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Status Person in Need of Protection Standard of Review

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Principal

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Spouse

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Child

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (rad) / Appeal Heard and Decided by Refugee Appeal Division; Decision on Merits Confirming RPD

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the appellants' credibility
  2. 2 Whether inconsistencies in testimony and documentary evidence (passport stamps, travel dates) justify rejection of the claim
  3. 3 Whether the minor born in the Dominican Republic has an independent fear or merely derives claim from parents

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's adverse credibility findings were justified by multiple, material contradictions between testimony and documentary evidence (including passport stamps and inconsistent travel history), implausible conduct and inadequate explanations for delays and actions; those credibility findings supported the conclusion that appellants did not meet the definitions in ss.96-97 IRPA, and the RAD therefore dismissed the appeal and confirmed the RPD decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Confirm RPD decision that XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX are neither Convention refugees under section 96 of the IRPA nor persons in need of protection under section 97 of the IRPA