MB9-04076

MB9-04076

The appeal is dismissed because the appellants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they are Convention refugees or in need of protection: the central allegations were undermined by material omissions in the Basis of Claim form, documentary evidence shows the dispute was being pursued through legal channels and the justice of the peace acted within jurisdiction, and the claimed risk arising from a land dispute with a police officer was not established as persecution or a real risk of cruel and unusual treatment.

Citation
MB9-04076
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision—reasons for Decision (appeal Heard and Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Credibility Assessment, Land Dispute, Judicial Review, Country Conditions
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Credibility Assessment Land Dispute Judicial Review Country Conditions

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision—reasons for Decision (appeal Heard and Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants meet the definition of Convention refugee or are persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether the principal appellant's credibility was properly assessed given omissions in the Basis of Claim form
  3. 3 Whether the land dispute and alleged threats by a police officer establish a risk of persecution or cruel and unusual treatment

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the appellants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they are Convention refugees or in need of protection: the central allegations were undermined by material omissions in the Basis of Claim form, documentary evidence shows the dispute was being pursued through legal channels and the justice of the peace acted within jurisdiction, and the claimed risk arising from a land dispute with a police officer was not established as persecution or a real risk of cruel and unusual treatment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; the Refugee Appeal Division confirms the Refugee Protection Division determination that the appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act