MC0-11253

MC0-11253

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD's adverse credibility findings are supported by material omissions, contradictions and inconsistencies in the appellants' accounts (including omission of a 2018 arrest and inconsistent arrest/membership histories), the new evidence admitted was not determinative, and objective evidence including the criminalization of FGM in Sudan and changing attitudes did not establish more than a mere possibility of recircumcision or that the principal appellant would be identified and persecuted on return; accordingly the appellants failed to prove refugee or protection claims on a balance of probabilities.

Citation
MC0-11253
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spouse / Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (final)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Sur Place Claim, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) IRPA and Rule 29), Gender Guideline Application, Best Interests of Children Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Gender Based Asylum Law Credibility Assessment Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Sur Place Claim Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) IRPA and Rule 29) +2 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 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse / Co Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the appellants' credibility
  2. 2 Whether the RPD properly applied the Gender Guideline to alleged FGM/recircumcision risk
  3. 3 Admissibility of post‑decision/new evidence under IRPA s.110(4) and RAD Rule 29

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD's adverse credibility findings are supported by material omissions, contradictions and inconsistencies in the appellants' accounts (including omission of a 2018 arrest and inconsistent arrest/membership histories), the new evidence admitted was not determinative, and objective evidence including the criminalization of FGM in Sudan and changing attitudes did not establish more than a mere possibility of recircumcision or that the principal appellant would be identified and persecuted on return; accordingly the appellants failed to prove refugee or protection claims on a balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division decision of December 14, 2020, confirmed; appellants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection