TB8-21782

TB8-21782

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD did not err: on the evidence the appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities an individualized s.97 risk from loan sharks and failed to rebut the presumption that Chinese state protection would be effective; credibility findings as to the house church claim precluded a s.97 assessment on that basis.

Citation
TB8-21782
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division From RPD Redetermination (re Hearing on S.97 Risk)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA
Legal Topics
State Protection, Section 97 IRPA Risk, Credibility Findings, Loan Sharks / Informal Lending, Illegal House Churches
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law State Protection Section 97 IRPA Risk Credibility Findings Loan Sharks / Informal Lending Illegal House Churches

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division From RPD Redetermination (re Hearing on S.97 Risk)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing risk under s.97 of the IRPA from loan sharks
  2. 2 Whether the RPD conducted an adequate State protection analysis
  3. 3 Whether the RPD misapplied s.96 analysis to a s.97 claim

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD did not err: on the evidence the appellant failed to prove on a balance of probabilities an individualized s.97 risk from loan sharks and failed to rebut the presumption that Chinese state protection would be effective; credibility findings as to the house church claim precluded a s.97 assessment on that basis.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed