MB9-11966

MB9-11966

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellant had indeterminate Brazilian permanent resident status with rights substantially similar to nationals, voluntarily abandoned that status by leaving Brazil for more than two years, and failed to establish on the balance of probabilities a current or prospective risk of persecution in Haiti or Brazil; therefore he is excluded under Article 1E of the Convention.

Citation
MB9-11966
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX; Respondent / Intervenor Before RPD: Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (exclusion Under Article 1 E) / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming Rpd)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellant excluded under Article 1E of the 1951 Refugee Convention pursuant to s.98 IRPA
Legal Topics
Exclusion Under Article 1 E, Permanent Residence in Third Country, Credibility Assessment, Risk Assessment, International Obligations
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Exclusion Under Article 1 E Permanent Residence in Third Country Credibility Assessment Risk Assessment International Obligations

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

Respondent / Intervenor Before RPD

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (exclusion Under Article 1 E) / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming Rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is excluded under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention pursuant to s.98 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the appellant held permanent resident status in Brazil with rights substantially similar to Brazilian nationals
  3. 3 Whether the appellant voluntarily lost Brazilian permanent residence by leaving the country for more than two years

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellant had indeterminate Brazilian permanent resident status with rights substantially similar to nationals, voluntarily abandoned that status by leaving Brazil for more than two years, and failed to establish on the balance of probabilities a current or prospective risk of persecution in Haiti or Brazil; therefore he is excluded under Article 1E of the Convention.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellant excluded under Article 1E of the 1951 Refugee Convention pursuant to s.98 IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RPD determination that appellant is excluded under Article 1E is confirmed