MB8-27456

MB8-27456

Appeal dismissed because the RAD upholds that appellants' credibility regarding the central extortion allegation is undermined by significant omissions and contradictions in their BOC Forms and testimony; the November 10, 2016 assault was established but not shown to be linked to the parents' alleged extortion; the alleged risk is generalized in Mexico rather than personalized; the female appellant did not establish a serious possibility of persecution on account of being a woman; new evidence (Justice in Mexico) was admitted but did not change outcome and no oral hearing was warranted.

Citation
MB8-27456
Parties
Appellant: Male appellant (redacted); Appellant: Female appellant (redacted); Child: Child 1 (redacted); Child: Child 2 (redacted)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal After Reopening Application (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Gender Based Persecution, Generalized Risk, Reopening and New Evidence, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Gender Based Persecution Generalized Risk Reopening and New Evidence Procedural Fairness

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

Parties

Male appellant (redacted)

Appellant

Female appellant (redacted)

Appellant

Child 1 (redacted)

Child

Child 2 (redacted)

Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal After Reopening Application (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants' testimony and BOC forms are credible
  2. 2 Whether the November 10, 2016 attack was linked to alleged extortion of the female appellant's parents
  3. 3 Whether appellants established a personalized risk versus a generalized risk in Mexico

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal dismissed because the RAD upholds that appellants' credibility regarding the central extortion allegation is undermined by significant omissions and contradictions in their BOC Forms and testimony; the November 10, 2016 assault was established but not shown to be linked to the parents' alleged extortion; the alleged risk is generalized in Mexico rather than personalized; the female appellant did not establish a serious possibility of persecution on account of being a woman; new evidence (Justice in Mexico) was admitted but did not change outcome and no oral hearing was warranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and Refugee Protection Division decision confirmed
  • New evidence "Justice in Mexico" (July 2020) admitted into the record