MB9-13946

MB9-13946

The RAD dismissed the appeal because contradictions, omissions and embellishments in the appellant's BOC Form, testimony and documentary evidence undermined his credibility; absent credible evidence the appellant failed to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution under section 96 or a personal need for protection under section 97 IRPA, and the RPD's decision was reasonable and is confirmed.

Citation
MB9-13946
Parties
Appellant / Person Subject of Appeal: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Review of RPD Decision) / Decision of RAD (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed (appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection)
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Persecution Risk, Section 96 IRPA, Section 97 IRPA, Documentary Evidence, Forms and Omissions (imm 5669, BOC Form)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Persecution Risk Section 96 IRPA Section 97 IRPA Documentary Evidence +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Subject of Appeal

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Review of RPD Decision) / Decision of RAD (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility assessment of the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the appellant established a serious possibility of persecution under section 96 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the appellant faces a personal risk of violence or persecution under section 97 IRPA or other protection grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal because contradictions, omissions and embellishments in the appellant's BOC Form, testimony and documentary evidence undermined his credibility; absent credible evidence the appellant failed to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution under section 96 or a personal need for protection under section 97 IRPA, and the RPD's decision was reasonable and is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed (appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD determination confirmed