TB9-21378

TB9-21378

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD's finding that the Appellants faced a generalized risk from widespread criminality in Guyana was reasonable; the Appellants did not prove personal targeting by an ex-police officer, did not show competent-counsel failings that would have changed the outcome, did not establish interpreter-related unfairness, and the documentary record and facts do not support that the female appellants face a serious possibility of persecution because they are women or belong to a particular social group.

Citation
TB9-21378
Parties
Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister; Panel: Ayanna Roberts
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal (rad)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility, Procedural Fairness, Interpreter Access, Counsel Incompetence, Particular Social Group, Generalized Risk, Residual Profile, Gender Based/sexual Violence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Procedural Fairness Interpreter Access Counsel Incompetence Particular Social Group +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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellants

XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister

Respondent

Ayanna Roberts

Panel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal (rad)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RPD erred in concluding the Appellants faced only a generalized risk in Guyana
  2. 2 Whether former counsel's alleged incompetence breached natural justice
  3. 3 Whether lack of an interpreter breached procedural fairness

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD's finding that the Appellants faced a generalized risk from widespread criminality in Guyana was reasonable; the Appellants did not prove personal targeting by an ex-police officer, did not show competent-counsel failings that would have changed the outcome, did not establish interpreter-related unfairness, and the documentary record and facts do not support that the female appellants face a serious possibility of persecution because they are women or belong to a particular social group.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of Refugee Protection Division confirmed