VB5-02372

VB5-02372

The RAD confirmed the RPD decision because appellants failed to establish nexus to a Convention ground and lacked credible objective evidence that the mayor would harm them on return; proposed new evidence did not meet s.110(4) admissibility criteria and no hearing was warranted; therefore appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
VB5-02372
Parties
Principal Appellant: Marc XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal (affirmation/dismissal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Admissibility of New Evidence, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Standard of Review, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Admissibility of New Evidence State Protection Internal Flight Alternative +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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Marc XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal (affirmation/dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is nexus to a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether appellants established an objectively well-founded fear of harm
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection exists in the Philippines

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD decision because appellants failed to establish nexus to a Convention ground and lacked credible objective evidence that the mayor would harm them on return; proposed new evidence did not meet s.110(4) admissibility criteria and no hearing was warranted; therefore appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division is confirmed
  • Appeal is dismissed