MB8-25916

MB8-25916

The appellant did not establish a personalized risk to his life because the four alleged incidents are more likely random acts of generalized criminality, he could not identify or show targeting by attackers, and his prolonged delay in leaving Haiti and failure to seek protection undermine the credibility of a fear for his life; therefore the RPD decision that he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection is confirmed.

Citation
MB8-25916
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision by Refugee Appeal Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.
Legal Topics
Credibility, Personalized Risk Vs Generalized Violence, Convention Refugee Status, Protection Claims, Admission of New Evidence, Delay in Seeking Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Personalized Risk Vs Generalized Violence Convention Refugee Status Protection Claims Admission of New Evidence +1 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision by Refugee Appeal Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant established a credible, personalized risk to his life in Haiti under s.97(1) IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the incidents alleged were acts of random/generalized violence or targeted persecution
  3. 3 Whether delay in leaving Haiti and failure to seek protection in Brazil/US undermined the claimed fear

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant did not establish a personalized risk to his life because the four alleged incidents are more likely random acts of generalized criminality, he could not identify or show targeting by attackers, and his prolonged delay in leaving Haiti and failure to seek protection undermine the credibility of a fear for his life; therefore the RPD decision that he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.

Orders

  • RAD dismisses the appeal and confirms the RPD decision pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  • Two training certificates not admitted as new evidence and not considered