TB9-10486

TB9-10486

The RAD independently assessed the record and found the Principal Appellant not credible due to persistent unexplained inconsistencies, suspect documentary evidence (police reports and affidavits) and an unexplained multi-year delay and repeated returns to Nigeria that undercut subjective fear; medical evidence did not cure these credibility defects. The Dependent Daughter's single-instance testimony of a threat was accepted but was insufficient to establish an ongoing risk of FGM or forced marriage. On this basis the RAD confirmed the RPD decision and dismissed the appeals.

Citation
TB9-10486
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Dependent Daughter: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Dependent Son: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Disposition)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are not Convention Refugees or Persons in Need of Protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Findings, Gender Based Persecution, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Forced Marriage, Admission of New Evidence (rad Rule 29), S96 IRPA, S97 IRPA, S110 IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Credibility Findings Gender Based Persecution Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Forced Marriage +4 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 6 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Dependent Daughter

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Dependent Son

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Principal Appellant is credible
  2. 2 Whether the RPD properly applied the Gender Guidelines
  3. 3 Whether additional evidence filed under RAD Rule 29 and s110(4) IRPA should be admitted and weighed

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD independently assessed the record and found the Principal Appellant not credible due to persistent unexplained inconsistencies, suspect documentary evidence (police reports and affidavits) and an unexplained multi-year delay and repeated returns to Nigeria that undercut subjective fear; medical evidence did not cure these credibility defects. The Dependent Daughter's single-instance testimony of a threat was accepted but was insufficient to establish an ongoing risk of FGM or forced marriage. On this basis the RAD confirmed the RPD decision and dismissed the appeals.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are not Convention Refugees or Persons in Need of Protection

Orders

  • Appeals of XXXX XXXX XXXX and dependents dismissed pursuant to s111(1)(a) IRPA
  • New affidavit and police report admitted but ultimately given no weight; courier evidence not admitted; no oral hearing ordered