VC0-00654

VC0-00654

On the whole record the RAD finds the RPD was correct: on a balance of probabilities the appellants are Kenyan nationals; their Ethiopian documents are irregular and originals were not produced; credibility is rebutted due to evasive testimony, material omissions, re‑availments to Kenya and unreasonable delay in leaving; therefore they do not face a serious possibility of persecution nor s.97 risk and are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection, appeal dismissed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Citation
VC0-00654
Parties
Appellant: Principal Appellant; Appellant: Associate Appellant
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / RAD Decision on Appeal From RPD Redetermination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision upheld; appellants found not to be Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Nationality Determination, Admissibility of New Evidence, State Protection, Re‑availment, Delay in Claiming, Material Omissions
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Nationality Determination Admissibility of New Evidence State Protection Re‑availment +2 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant

Appellant

Associate Appellant

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / RAD Decision on Appeal From RPD Redetermination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are Ethiopian or Kenyan nationals
  2. 2 Admissibility and weight of new evidence under IRPA s.110(4) and Singh
  3. 3 Credibility of appellants given document irregularities and omissions

Ratio Decidendi

On the whole record the RAD finds the RPD was correct: on a balance of probabilities the appellants are Kenyan nationals; their Ethiopian documents are irregular and originals were not produced; credibility is rebutted due to evasive testimony, material omissions, re‑availments to Kenya and unreasonable delay in leaving; therefore they do not face a serious possibility of persecution nor s.97 risk and are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection, appeal dismissed under IRPA s.111(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision upheld; appellants found not to be Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(a)
  • No RAD oral hearing granted as new evidence is not determinative