TB7-20791

TB7-20791

RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellants were not credible on central allegations and failed to produce clear and convincing evidence that state protection in Hungary is unavailable or that they reasonably exhausted domestic remedies; given Hungary is a functioning democracy the presumption of state protection stands and the appeals fail.

Citation
TB7-20791
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); First Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); Second Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); Third Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); Fourth Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); Fifth Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); First Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); Second Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX); Third Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX (XXXX XXXX); Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(a).
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credibility, Natural Justice, Joinder, Roma Discrimination
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law State Protection Credibility Natural Justice Joinder Roma Discrimination

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

First Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

Second Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

Third Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

Fourth Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

Fifth Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

First Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

Second Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX (XXXX XXXX)

Third Minor Appellant

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) From Refugee Protection Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants were denied natural justice and entitled to an oral hearing
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings
  3. 3 Whether appellants rebutted the presumption of state protection for Hungary

Ratio Decidendi

RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellants were not credible on central allegations and failed to produce clear and convincing evidence that state protection in Hungary is unavailable or that they reasonably exhausted domestic remedies; given Hungary is a functioning democracy the presumption of state protection stands and the appeals fail.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated July 25, 2017 is confirmed