MB9-20339

MB9-20339

Although the RPD erred in characterizing the written account as implausible, the appeal is dismissed because the appellant was not credible: he failed to explain omission of the assailants' group name from his written account, produced a police complaint that did not identify the group, had unexplained contradictions about his relocations and addresses, and remained in Haiti for an extended period contrary to alleged power of the perpetrators, and therefore did not meet the burden to prove personal risk on a balance of probabilities.

Citation
MB9-20339
Parties
Appellant (person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal): XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that the appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee, Risk of Torture, Implausibility Findings, Personal Risk Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Findings Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Risk of Torture Implausibility Findings +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 3 Authorities cited 5 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

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) correctly assessed the appellant's credibility
  2. 2 Whether an internal flight alternative existed
  3. 3 Whether the appellant established personal risk under s.97 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

Although the RPD erred in characterizing the written account as implausible, the appeal is dismissed because the appellant was not credible: he failed to explain omission of the assailants' group name from his written account, produced a police complaint that did not identify the group, had unexplained contradictions about his relocations and addresses, and remained in Haiti for an extended period contrary to alleged power of the perpetrators, and therefore did not meet the burden to prove personal risk on a balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that the appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed; no refugee protection granted