MB8-15979

MB8-15979

The RAD denied the application to admit late evidence because the required affidavit/statutory declaration was not provided and the documents had little probative value and could likely have been obtained earlier; reviewing the record independently, the RAD found the RPD's credibility findings were reasonable given contradictions, omissions and adjustments and that the evidence did not establish a serious possibility of persecution or inadequate state protection, so the appeal is dismissed and the RPD determination is confirmed.

Citation
MB8-15979
Parties
Appellant (male): Male appellant (name redacted); Appellant (female): Female appellant (name redacted)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Determination) / Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Procedural Fairness, Convention Refugee Determination, State Protection, Cumulative Discrimination
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Procedural Fairness Convention Refugee Determination State Protection +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Male appellant (name redacted)

Appellant (male)

Female appellant (name redacted)

Appellant (female)

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RAD should admit new evidence filed after perfecting the appeal under RAD Rules r.29 and r.37
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the appellants' credibility
  3. 3 Whether the appellants established a well‑founded fear/serious possibility of persecution on Convention grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD denied the application to admit late evidence because the required affidavit/statutory declaration was not provided and the documents had little probative value and could likely have been obtained earlier; reviewing the record independently, the RAD found the RPD's credibility findings were reasonable given contradictions, omissions and adjustments and that the evidence did not establish a serious possibility of persecution or inadequate state protection, so the appeal is dismissed and the RPD determination is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Application to admit new evidence denied
  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed