TB9-18230

TB9-18230

The Appellant failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that he is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner because his testimony showed inconsistent, minimal knowledge of core texts, inadequate participation in required study despite access in Canada, and no corroborative evidence or indication that his Canadian activities would attract attention from Chinese authorities; accordingly the RAD confirmed the RPD's credibility finding and dismissed the appeal.

Citation
TB9-18230
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Final Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision dated June 4, 2019 under s.111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Religious Persecution, Sur Place Doctrine, Standard of Review, Statutory Confirmation of Decisions
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Religious Persecution Sur Place Doctrine Standard of Review Statutory Confirmation of Decisions

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Final Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner
  2. 2 Whether the RPD's credibility findings were reasonable and supported
  3. 3 Whether a sur place claim exists

Ratio Decidendi

The Appellant failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that he is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner because his testimony showed inconsistent, minimal knowledge of core texts, inadequate participation in required study despite access in Canada, and no corroborative evidence or indication that his Canadian activities would attract attention from Chinese authorities; accordingly the RAD confirmed the RPD's credibility finding and dismissed the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision dated June 4, 2019 under s.111(1)(a) IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated June 4, 2019 is confirmed