MB9-28563

MB9-28563

The RAD upheld the RPD's negative credibility findings based on unexplained omissions, internal inconsistencies in testimony and written statements, late submission of documentary evidence, and obvious errors and alterations in key documents; because the appellant failed to prove his account on a balance of probabilities, the RPD correctly concluded he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
MB9-28563
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX; Respondent / Minister: Minister (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division (credibility Review)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Document Authenticity, Evidence Admissibility, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Document Authenticity Evidence Admissibility +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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister (Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada)

Respondent / Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division (credibility Review)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in concluding the appellant was not credible
  2. 2 Whether omissions and inconsistencies in testimony and written statements undermine the appellant's claim
  3. 3 Whether irregularities and alterations in documentary evidence (death certificate, registry minutes, Exhibit P-7) render those documents unprobatative

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD upheld the RPD's negative credibility findings based on unexplained omissions, internal inconsistencies in testimony and written statements, late submission of documentary evidence, and obvious errors and alterations in key documents; because the appellant failed to prove his account on a balance of probabilities, the RPD correctly concluded he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division decision confirmed; appellant not found to be a Convention refugee or person in need of protection