MB9-23576

MB9-23576

The RAD confirmed the RPD because central omissions and inconsistencies in the Appellants' account (omission of an alleged government letter, inconsistent account of meeting with the SSP, and inconsistent visa application timeline) rendered them not credible; the solemn declaration was inadmissible as it was not new or reasonably unavailable, and no admissible new evidence raised a central issue that would justify allowing the appeal.

Citation
MB9-23576
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Convention Refugee Determination, Standard of Review, Risk and Protection Claims
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Convention Refugee Determination Standard of Review Risk and Protection Claims

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellants are credible
  2. 2 Whether the solemn declaration is admissible as new evidence
  3. 3 Whether the Appellants meet the definition of a Convention refugee or are persons in need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD because central omissions and inconsistencies in the Appellants' account (omission of an alleged government letter, inconsistent account of meeting with the SSP, and inconsistent visa application timeline) rendered them not credible; the solemn declaration was inadmissible as it was not new or reasonably unavailable, and no admissible new evidence raised a central issue that would justify allowing the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated August 16, 2019 is confirmed