TB6-06280

TB6-06280

The RAD, applying the correctness standard to the RPD's factual and credibility findings, confirmed that unresolved material inconsistencies in testimony and weaknesses in supporting police/court documents, together with country evidence indicating lack of systematic persecution and evidence pointing to a criminal gang motive, mean the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground; appeals dismissed.

Citation
TB6-06280
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associated Appellant (mother): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for Appellants: Hart A. Kaminker; Respondent (minister of Immigration): Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 July 2016
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal From Refugee Protection Division Decision / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Disposition Issued
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Standard of Review, State Protection, Convention Refugee, Internal Flight Alternative, Documentary Evidence Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Findings Standard of Review State Protection Convention Refugee Internal Flight Alternative +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

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

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellants

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associated Appellant (mother)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Hart A. Kaminker

Counsel for Appellants

Minister

Respondent (minister of Immigration)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal From Refugee Protection Division Decision / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Disposition Issued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings regarding the alleged attack and supporting documentation
  2. 2 Whether the applicants were targeted for reasons of religion (Convention ground)
  3. 3 Whether the state provided protection and whether there existed a real risk of persecution

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD, applying the correctness standard to the RPD's factual and credibility findings, confirmed that unresolved material inconsistencies in testimony and weaknesses in supporting police/court documents, together with country evidence indicating lack of systematic persecution and evidence pointing to a criminal gang motive, mean the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground; appeals dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA

Orders

  • RAD confirms RPD decision dated March 29, 2016
  • Appeals dismissed pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act