TB8-24232

TB8-24232

The Appellant was found to have allowed Trinidad and Tobago permanent resident status to lapse but nonetheless to possess status substantially similar to nationality under Article 1(E); independent credibility findings rejected her account of inquiries about status, her role in the family restaurant and the alleged gang threats, and rejected her asserted Falun Gong practice in Trinidad and China as uncorroborated and not genuine; on the balance of probabilities there is no serious possibility of persecution in Trinidad or China, therefore she is excluded under Article 1(E) and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TB8-24232
Parties
Appellant (person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal): XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister; Panel Member / Tribunal: Linda Hart
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision of September 4, 2018 affirmed; Appellant excluded under Article 1(E) and found not to be a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Article 1(e) Exclusion, Convention Refugee Status, Credibility Assessment, Sur Place Claims, Risk of Persecution, Country Conditions, Falun Gong
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law International Law Article 1(e) Exclusion Convention Refugee Status Credibility Assessment Sur Place Claims +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal)

Minister

Respondent

Linda Hart

Panel Member / Tribunal

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant is excluded from refugee protection under Article 1(E) of the 1951 Refugee Convention
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant holds status in Trinidad and Tobago comparable to nationality for purposes of Article 1(E)
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant's account of gang threats and restaurant management is credible

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant was found to have allowed Trinidad and Tobago permanent resident status to lapse but nonetheless to possess status substantially similar to nationality under Article 1(E); independent credibility findings rejected her account of inquiries about status, her role in the family restaurant and the alleged gang threats, and rejected her asserted Falun Gong practice in Trinidad and China as uncorroborated and not genuine; on the balance of probabilities there is no serious possibility of persecution in Trinidad or China, therefore she is excluded under Article 1(E) and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision of September 4, 2018 affirmed; Appellant excluded under Article 1(E) and found not to be a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.