TC0-11293

TC0-11293

The RAD, applying the correctness standard, found the RPD's adverse credibility findings justified because the Principal Appellant's central inconsistencies and material omissions (discrepant identification and inflation of agents of harm, failure to disclose multiple physical assaults in the BOC, and unexplained returns to Nigeria after travel) rebutted the presumption of truthfulness and doomed both the principal and dependent claims; therefore the RPD decision was confirmed.

Citation
TC0-11293
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Basis of Claim Omissions, Failure to Seek Protection Abroad, Agents of Harm Identification, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Basis of Claim Omissions Failure to Seek Protection Abroad Agents of Harm Identification +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division Confirming RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Principal Appellant's testimony is credible
  2. 2 Whether omissions from the Basis of Claim are material and justify adverse credibility findings
  3. 3 Whether the Appellants failed to seek protection in alternative countries undermining subjective fear

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD, applying the correctness standard, found the RPD's adverse credibility findings justified because the Principal Appellant's central inconsistencies and material omissions (discrepant identification and inflation of agents of harm, failure to disclose multiple physical assaults in the BOC, and unexplained returns to Nigeria after travel) rebutted the presumption of truthfulness and doomed both the principal and dependent claims; therefore the RPD decision was confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and the Refugee Protection Division decision dated October 6, 2020 is confirmed: Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.