MB6-05591

MB6-05591

Although some RPD evidentiary assessments contained errors, independent review found significant unchallenged adverse credibility findings (manufactured/fraudulent documents, unexplained contradictions) and objective evidence (IRB research Directorate correspondence) that together rebut the presumption of truth and leave the appellants unable to prove on a balance of probabilities that the principal acted as an agent/informant for the alleged organization or that that organization collaborated with police for intelligence operations; new government website printouts were admitted but were not determinative; therefore the RPD decision rejecting the refugee claim is upheld.

Citation
MB6-05591
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Spouse: XXXX XXXX; Minor Child: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (rad Decision Confirming Rpd)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Admissibility of New Evidence on Appeal, Standard of Review on Appeal, Corroboration of Documentary Evidence, Article 1 F Exclusion
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Credibility Findings Admissibility of New Evidence on Appeal Standard of Review on Appeal Corroboration of Documentary Evidence +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Spouse

XXXX XXXX

Minor Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (rad Decision Confirming Rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its assessment of documentary and corroborative evidence
  2. 2 Whether new evidence should be admitted under s.110(4) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether an oral hearing before the RAD was required

Ratio Decidendi

Although some RPD evidentiary assessments contained errors, independent review found significant unchallenged adverse credibility findings (manufactured/fraudulent documents, unexplained contradictions) and objective evidence (IRB research Directorate correspondence) that together rebut the presumption of truth and leave the appellants unable to prove on a balance of probabilities that the principal acted as an agent/informant for the alleged organization or that that organization collaborated with police for intelligence operations; new government website printouts were admitted but were not determinative; therefore the RPD decision rejecting the refugee claim is upheld.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • New evidence (three Albanian government website printouts) admitted on appeal pursuant to s.110(4) IRPA
  • Request for oral hearing denied