MB8-02935

MB8-02935

The appeals are dismissed because the RPD reasonably found significant contradictions and a lack of corroborating evidence that undermined the appellants' credibility, and the appellants therefore failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they face a risk of persecution or serious harm if returned to the DRC.

Citation
MB8-02935
Parties
Appellant: Male appellant; Appellant: Female appellant
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Protection Division Decision Reviewed) / Final Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Credibility, Risk of Persecution, Political Opinion, State Protection, Non Refoulement
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Risk of Persecution Political Opinion State Protection Non Refoulement

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Male appellant

Appellant

Female appellant

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Protection Division Decision Reviewed) / Final Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are credible about a threat from a high-ranking state individual in 2011
  2. 2 Whether appellants are credible that their father was killed for opposition political activity and that this creates a present risk to them
  3. 3 Whether documentary evidence corroborates the appellants' allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals are dismissed because the RPD reasonably found significant contradictions and a lack of corroborating evidence that undermined the appellants' credibility, and the appellants therefore failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they face a risk of persecution or serious harm if returned to the DRC.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed