TB8-31826

TB8-31826

The RAD confirmed the RPD because it found, on the balance of probabilities, that the Medical Certificate of Birth (and related hukou and death certificate) contained multiple, material inconsistencies and were not genuine; those fraudulent documents were central to the claim, fatally undermined the Appellants' credibility, and consequently the Appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk as required under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
TB8-31826
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division — Final Decision on Merits
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Credibility Findings, Fraudulent Documents, Standard of Review, Well Founded Fear of Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Refugee Protection Credibility Findings Fraudulent Documents Standard of Review +1 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division — Final Decision on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD made adequate credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether the birth certificate, hukou and death certificate were genuine
  3. 3 Whether fraudulent documents vitiated the claim and overall credibility

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD because it found, on the balance of probabilities, that the Medical Certificate of Birth (and related hukou and death certificate) contained multiple, material inconsistencies and were not genuine; those fraudulent documents were central to the claim, fatally undermined the Appellants' credibility, and consequently the Appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk as required under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RPD decision dated November 7, 2018 confirmed