TB5-03059

TB5-03059

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the Appellants failed to provide sufficient credible evidence to establish they are homosexuals and to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution; adverse credibility findings regarding omissions, fabricated testimony and reliance on generalizations were determinative and justified dismissal of the appeals.

Citation
TB5-03059
Parties
Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXA.K.A.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXA.K.A.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXA.K.A.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division (rpd) Decision
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility, Convention Refugee, Standard of Review, Sexual Orientation Persecution, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Convention Refugee Standard of Review Sexual Orientation Persecution 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXA.K.A.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXA.K.A.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXXA.K.A.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellants

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division (rpd) Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RAD should set aside the RPD decision that the Appellants are not Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility findings regarding testimony about sexual orientation
  3. 3 Whether the RPD's finding that testimony confirming each other's sexual orientation was self-serving created a reasonable apprehension of bias

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the Appellants failed to provide sufficient credible evidence to establish they are homosexuals and to demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution; adverse credibility findings regarding omissions, fabricated testimony and reliance on generalizations were determinative and justified dismissal of the appeals.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • RPD decision confirmed