MB8-27839

MB8-27839

The RAD affirmed the RPD: incidents in Brazil amounted to discrimination not persecution and did not establish a serious possibility of persecution; the male appellant voluntarily abandoned Brazilian permanent resident status and therefore is excluded under Article 1E of the Convention pursuant to s.98 IRPA; the female appellant remained a Brazilian permanent resident at hearing and is excluded; the minor failed to discharge the burden of proof of a serious risk; the submitted medical certificate was inadmissible as new evidence because it pre-dated the RPD decision and was reasonably available.

Citation
MB8-27839
Parties
Principal Appellant (male): XXXX XXXX; Appellant (female Spouse): XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division to Dismiss Appeal (rad Determination)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determinations confirmed
Legal Topics
Exclusion Under Article 1 E of the 1951 Convention, Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Persecution Vs Discrimination, Permanent Resident Status and Reentry
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Exclusion Under Article 1 E of the 1951 Convention Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Persecution Vs Discrimination +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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant (male)

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (female Spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division to Dismiss Appeal (rad Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are excluded under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention
  2. 2 Whether the appellants established a serious possibility of persecution in Brazil
  3. 3 Whether the appellants established a serious possibility of persecution in Haiti

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD affirmed the RPD: incidents in Brazil amounted to discrimination not persecution and did not establish a serious possibility of persecution; the male appellant voluntarily abandoned Brazilian permanent resident status and therefore is excluded under Article 1E of the Convention pursuant to s.98 IRPA; the female appellant remained a Brazilian permanent resident at hearing and is excluded; the minor failed to discharge the burden of proof of a serious risk; the submitted medical certificate was inadmissible as new evidence because it pre-dated the RPD decision and was reasonably available.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determinations confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA
  • Confirm RPD determination that the minor appellant is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection