MB8-26607

MB8-26607

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD's adverse credibility findings were supported by multiple, unexplained contradictions and late adjustments between the Basis of Claim and oral testimony, corroborating documents that contradicted the appellant's account, and implausible explanations for not seeking asylum in the United States; therefore the appellant failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that he is a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
MB8-26607
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent); Panel Member: Ayanna Roberts
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Asylum, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Corroboration, Basis of Claim (boc) Contradictions, Prior Travel to United States, Evidentiary Inconsistencies
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Asylum Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Corroboration +3 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Ayanna Roberts

Panel Member

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant was credible regarding the alleged 2015 attack and related facts
  2. 2 Whether contradictions and omissions between the Basis of Claim form and testimony justified rejection of the claim
  3. 3 Whether the appellant established a well‑founded fear of persecution or need for protection

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD's adverse credibility findings were supported by multiple, unexplained contradictions and late adjustments between the Basis of Claim and oral testimony, corroborating documents that contradicted the appellant's account, and implausible explanations for not seeking asylum in the United States; therefore the appellant failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that he is a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated October 15, 2018 confirmed.