TC0-05877

TC0-05877

The RPD correctly found the Appellant's evidence not credible and insufficiently corroborated, including inconsistent testimony about lost documentation and implausible explanations for exiting China while wanted; therefore the Appellant failed to establish he is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner or that he faces a serious possibility of persecution or risk on return, and the RAD dismisses the appeal under paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA confirming the RPD decision.

Citation
TC0-05877
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision Under Irpa) / Decision at Refugee Appeal Division; RPD Decision Confirmed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility, Sur Place Claims, Refugee Protection, Burden of Proof, Documentary Corroboration
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Sur Place Claims Refugee Protection Burden of Proof Documentary Corroboration

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision Under Irpa) / Decision at Refugee Appeal Division; RPD Decision Confirmed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in rejecting the refugee claim
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant is a genuine practitioner of Falun Gong
  3. 3 Whether the Appellant faces a serious possibility of persecution or risk on return to China under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD correctly found the Appellant's evidence not credible and insufficiently corroborated, including inconsistent testimony about lost documentation and implausible explanations for exiting China while wanted; therefore the Appellant failed to establish he is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner or that he faces a serious possibility of persecution or risk on return, and the RAD dismisses the appeal under paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA confirming the RPD decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection