VC0-01386

VC0-01386

The appeal is dismissed because the admitted new evidence did not undermine the RPD's credibility findings, the appellant's allegations of recent threats and her 2016 travel history were inconsistent and uncorroborated, the evidence did not establish a well‑founded fear of persecution or individualized risk to the appellant or her children, and the statutory criteria for an oral hearing were not met.

Citation
VC0-01386
Parties
Appellant: Principal Appellant (name redacted); Minor Appellant: Minor Appellant 1 (name redacted); Minor Appellant: Minor Appellant 2 (name redacted)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Amended Reasons and Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility, New Evidence Admissibility, Oral Hearing, Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility New Evidence Admissibility Oral Hearing +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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant (name redacted)

Appellant

Minor Appellant 1 (name redacted)

Minor Appellant

Minor Appellant 2 (name redacted)

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Amended Reasons and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA
  2. 2 Requirement for oral hearing under s.110(6) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of appellant and corroboration of claims

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the admitted new evidence did not undermine the RPD's credibility findings, the appellant's allegations of recent threats and her 2016 travel history were inconsistent and uncorroborated, the evidence did not establish a well‑founded fear of persecution or individualized risk to the appellant or her children, and the statutory criteria for an oral hearing were not met.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed