MB8-08797

MB8-08797

The RAD dismissed the appeal: it set aside some RPD credibility findings but held the male appellant excluded under Article 1E of the Convention and section 98 IRPA because he had Brazilian permanent resident status and did not demonstrate a well-founded fear or prospective risk in Brazil; the female appellant failed to establish persecution or a risk under sections 96 or 97 IRPA if returned to Haiti and an internal flight alternative was available; accordingly the RPD's determinations rejecting protection were confirmed and the appeal was dismissed under paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
MB8-08797
Parties
Appellant (principal): XXXX XXXX (male appellant); Appellant (derivative): XXXX XXXX (female appellant)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division
Legal Topics
Exclusion Under Article 1 E, Prospective Risk, Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, Standard of Review, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Exclusion Under Article 1 E Prospective Risk Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative Standard of Review +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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX (male appellant)

Appellant (principal)

XXXX XXXX (female appellant)

Appellant (derivative)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the male appellant is excluded under Article 1E of the Convention and section 98 IRPA due to permanent resident status in Brazil and absence of prospective risk in Brazil
  2. 2 Whether the female appellant established a serious possibility of persecution under section 96 IRPA or a risk under section 97 IRPA if returned to Haiti
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings and application of the appropriate standard of review

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal: it set aside some RPD credibility findings but held the male appellant excluded under Article 1E of the Convention and section 98 IRPA because he had Brazilian permanent resident status and did not demonstrate a well-founded fear or prospective risk in Brazil; the female appellant failed to establish persecution or a risk under sections 96 or 97 IRPA if returned to Haiti and an internal flight alternative was available; accordingly the RPD's determinations rejecting protection were confirmed and the appeal was dismissed under paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA.