TB6-12022

TB6-12022

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Principal Appellant's unexplained failure to seek asylum in Israel undermined his claimed subjective fear; documentary irregularities and overall credibility findings justified giving no weight to the contested documents; no new s.110(4) evidence was filed so no oral hearing was warranted; on balance of probabilities the Appellants did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution or need for protection, therefore appeal dismissed.

Citation
TB6-12022
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Secondary Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) of the IRPA
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Corroboration and Documentary Weight, Failure to Claim in a Safe Country, Request for Oral Hearing Under S.110(6) IRPA, Well Founded Fear, Need for Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Findings Corroboration and Documentary Weight Failure to Claim in a Safe Country Request for Oral Hearing Under S.110(6) IRPA Well Founded Fear +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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Secondary Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether the Principal Appellant's failure to claim asylum in Israel undermines subjective fear
  3. 3 Whether the letter about the Minor Appellant and the newspaper article should have been given weight

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Principal Appellant's unexplained failure to seek asylum in Israel undermined his claimed subjective fear; documentary irregularities and overall credibility findings justified giving no weight to the contested documents; no new s.110(4) evidence was filed so no oral hearing was warranted; on balance of probabilities the Appellants did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution or need for protection, therefore appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) of the IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed
  • Request for oral hearing pursuant to s.110(6) IRPA denied