MB9-09874

MB9-09874

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings: the principal and associate appellants gave materially inconsistent testimony, omitted and contradicted key allegations (spouse's role, church membership details, documentary and photographic corroboration), and failed to prove membership or risk on a balance of probabilities; the minor, a US citizen, presented no objective evidence of risk in the United States and separation alone does not constitute persecution; therefore the RPD's decision rejecting refugee protection was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MB9-09874
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (niece by Marriage): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (daughter, US Citizen): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection, Child Claimant Assessment, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Status Person in Need of Protection Child Claimant Assessment 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (niece by Marriage)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (daughter, US Citizen)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the adult appellants' credibility
  2. 2 Whether the minor appellant, a United States citizen, has a well‑founded fear of persecution on return to the US
  3. 3 Whether documentary and photographic evidence corroborated membership in the Light of the World church

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings: the principal and associate appellants gave materially inconsistent testimony, omitted and contradicted key allegations (spouse's role, church membership details, documentary and photographic corroboration), and failed to prove membership or risk on a balance of probabilities; the minor, a US citizen, presented no objective evidence of risk in the United States and separation alone does not constitute persecution; therefore the RPD's decision rejecting refugee protection was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and impugned decision confirmed: appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection