MB8-11990

MB8-11990

Although the RPD made some factual errors in assessing discrete points, the RAD found no credible nexus between the appellant's political opinion and the threats/attacks, and therefore confirmed the RPD's conclusion that the appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under IRPA because he did not establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk to life or cruel/unusual treatment on return.

Citation
MB8-11990
Parties
Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Nexus to a Protected Ground, Procedural Fairness, Country Condition Evidence, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Protection Administrative Law Credibility Findings Nexus to a Protected Ground Procedural Fairness Country Condition Evidence Standard of Review

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD's adverse credibility findings were justified
  2. 2 Whether the threats and attacks were motivated by the appellant's political opinion (nexus)
  3. 3 Whether the RPD breached principles of natural justice or procedural fairness

Ratio Decidendi

Although the RPD made some factual errors in assessing discrete points, the RAD found no credible nexus between the appellant's political opinion and the threats/attacks, and therefore confirmed the RPD's conclusion that the appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under IRPA because he did not establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk to life or cruel/unusual treatment on return.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • RAD dismisses the appeal and confirms the RPD determination that XXXX XXXX is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 and paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA