VB9-08509

VB9-08509

The RAD dismissed the appeals because the minor male appellant failed to demonstrate a risk of persecution or harm in the United States and the Principal Appellant and minor female appellant failed to rebut the presumption of available and effective state protection in Singapore; credibility accepted but does not substitute for the required legal elements for refugee or protected person status.

Citation
VB9-08509
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Female Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Male Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
Legal Topics
State Protection, Risk of Harm/section 97 IRPA, Family Unity, Gender Related Persecution, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights State Protection Risk of Harm/section 97 IRPA Family Unity Gender Related Persecution +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Female Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Male Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the minor male appellant faces a well-founded fear of persecution or a risk of harm in the United States
  2. 2 Whether the Principal Appellant and minor female appellant rebutted the presumption of effective state protection in Singapore
  3. 3 Whether family unity can, on its own, attract refugee protection

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeals because the minor male appellant failed to demonstrate a risk of persecution or harm in the United States and the Principal Appellant and minor female appellant failed to rebut the presumption of available and effective state protection in Singapore; credibility accepted but does not substitute for the required legal elements for refugee or protected person status.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • RAD confirms RPD decision that Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection