MB4-03163

MB4-03163

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility finding and granted it deference on the determinative factual issues: material inconsistencies and omissions in the BOC and testimony, absence of corroboration for the asserted business and events, and unjustified delay rendered the appellants' account not proven on a balance of probabilities, therefore they do not qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Citation
MB4-03163
Parties
Appellant: Mr. XXXX XXXX; Appellant: Ms. XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division — Judicial Review of Refugee Protection Division Credibility Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Corroboration, Delay in Claiming
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Corroboration Delay in Claiming

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Ms. XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division — Judicial Review of Refugee Protection Division Credibility Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility assessment of the appellants
  2. 2 Whether the appellants meet the definition of a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the appellants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility finding and granted it deference on the determinative factual issues: material inconsistencies and omissions in the BOC and testimony, absence of corroboration for the asserted business and events, and unjustified delay rendered the appellants' account not proven on a balance of probabilities, therefore they do not qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division determination confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection