MB5-04963

MB5-04963

The RAD upheld the RPD's adverse credibility findings as reasonable and determinative: material inconsistencies and contradictions in the appellant's testimony (dates of events, knowledge of attendees, claimed duties, and timing of documents) undermine his claim; the new documentary evidence either was inadmissible or did not raise issues sufficient to disturb credibility or to warrant a hearing; therefore the appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MB5-04963
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent); Tribunal / Panel (decision by Roxane Cyr): Refugee Appeal Division, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 August 2016
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellant is not a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) Irpa), Hearing Requirement (s.110(6) Irpa), Standard of Review / Deference
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4) Irpa) +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Refugee Appeal Division, Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada

Tribunal / Panel (decision by Roxane Cyr)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its adverse credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether documents filed on appeal met the admissibility test in s.110(4) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether a hearing before the RAD was required under s.110(6) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD upheld the RPD's adverse credibility findings as reasonable and determinative: material inconsistencies and contradictions in the appellant's testimony (dates of events, knowledge of attendees, claimed duties, and timing of documents) undermine his claim; the new documentary evidence either was inadmissible or did not raise issues sufficient to disturb credibility or to warrant a hearing; therefore the appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellant is not a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed
  • Documents A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-6 admitted into evidence on appeal