MB9-13401

MB9-13401

The RPD correctly found the appellant's risk arises from generalized criminality in Haiti rather than persecution linked to a Convention ground; the appellant failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution by reason of gender or any other protected ground, the proffered new evidence was inadmissible as it was reasonably available before the RPD, and therefore the RAD confirmed the RPD decision and dismissed the appeal.

Citation
MB9-13401
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision of the Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Generalized Risk, Personalized Risk, Particular Social Group, New Evidence Admissibility, Standard of Review, Oral Hearing Request
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Generalized Risk Personalized Risk Particular Social Group New Evidence Admissibility 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 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision of the Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred under section 96 of the IRPA in finding no nexus to a Convention ground (membership in the particular social group of women)
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred under section 97 of the IRPA in finding the appellant's risk to be generalized rather than a personalized risk
  3. 3 Whether new evidence (affidavit and husband's letter) should have been admitted under s.110(4) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD correctly found the appellant's risk arises from generalized criminality in Haiti rather than persecution linked to a Convention ground; the appellant failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution by reason of gender or any other protected ground, the proffered new evidence was inadmissible as it was reasonably available before the RPD, and therefore the RAD confirmed the RPD decision and dismissed the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Confirm RPD decision dated May 29, 2019 and dismiss the appeal
  • Reject new evidence consisting of the appellant's affidavit dated July 11, 2019 and the husband's letter dated July 8, 2019 as inadmissible under s.110(4) IRPA