MB9-02689

MB9-02689

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the evidence shows only a single 2017 incident and one threatening call, no corroborating or subsequent threats, inconsistencies and speculation regarding ongoing intent by criminals, and no objective evidence that the appellants face a serious possibility of gender-based persecution; applying the correctness standard, the RPD did not err and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MB9-02689
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal to Rad; No New Evidence or Oral Hearing Requested
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Gender Based Persecution, Credibility Assessment, Standard of Review, Prospective Risk
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Gender Based Persecution Credibility Assessment Standard of Review +1 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal to Rad; No New Evidence or Oral Hearing Requested

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the appellants' prospective risk of harm in Haiti
  2. 2 Whether surrendering disputed land is a reasonable alternative to seeking protection
  3. 3 Whether the principal appellant and her daughter face gender-based persecution in Haiti

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the evidence shows only a single 2017 incident and one threatening call, no corroborating or subsequent threats, inconsistencies and speculation regarding ongoing intent by criminals, and no objective evidence that the appellants face a serious possibility of gender-based persecution; applying the correctness standard, the RPD did not err and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Refugee Protection Division determination of January 15, 2019 confirmed