MB8-18223

MB8-18223

The RAD confirms the RPD: the appellants retained Brazilian permanent resident status and are excluded under Article 1E; the alleged discrimination, economic hardship and workplace mistreatment do not amount to persecution nor show a failure of Brazilian state protection; the minor child does not claim against Brazil. Appeal dismissed.

Citation
MB8-18223
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Spouse/appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Child: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons Issued July 15, 2019)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Exclusion Under Article 1 E, Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection, Persecution, Permanent Resident Status Abroad, Racial and Nationality Discrimination
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Law Exclusion Under Article 1 E Convention Refugee Status Person in Need of Protection Persecution Permanent Resident Status Abroad +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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse/appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons Issued July 15, 2019)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are excluded under Article 1E of the Refugee Convention due to holding Brazilian permanent resident status
  2. 2 Whether discrimination and workplace mistreatment based on nationality and skin colour amount to persecution
  3. 3 Whether the state of Brazil would fail to protect the appellants from alleged harm

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirms the RPD: the appellants retained Brazilian permanent resident status and are excluded under Article 1E; the alleged discrimination, economic hardship and workplace mistreatment do not amount to persecution nor show a failure of Brazilian state protection; the minor child does not claim against Brazil. Appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RPD determination confirmed that appellants are excluded under Article 1E and are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96-98 IRPA