TC0-11169

TC0-11169

The RPD's adverse credibility findings were correct and dispositive: the Appellants provided vague, inconsistent testimony and uncorroborated documentary evidence which failed to establish past persecution or a serious possibility of future persecution; they failed to corroborate their US asylum history; there is no objective basis for claims based on their residual profiles; the youngest minor (a US citizen) has no claim against the USA; therefore the Appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the appeal is dismissed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Citation
TC0-11169
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellants: XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under Irpa) / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Appellants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Protection Claim, Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, Nexus, Country Conditions, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Protection Claim Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative Nexus +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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellants

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under Irpa) / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings regarding past harm and future risk
  2. 2 Whether there is an objective basis for claims based on the Appellants' residual profiles
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative (Islamabad) is safe and reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's adverse credibility findings were correct and dispositive: the Appellants provided vague, inconsistent testimony and uncorroborated documentary evidence which failed to establish past persecution or a serious possibility of future persecution; they failed to corroborate their US asylum history; there is no objective basis for claims based on their residual profiles; the youngest minor (a US citizen) has no claim against the USA; therefore the Appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the appeal is dismissed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Appellants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed pursuant to Immigration and Refugee Protection Act s.111(1)(a).