MB9-16431

MB9-16431

The RAD affirms the RPD: the adult appellants had permanent resident status in Brazil, voluntarily lost that status by remaining outside Brazil for over two years without showing persecution there, the discrimination alleged did not amount to persecution, material omissions in the BOC undermined credibility regarding risk in Haiti, and therefore the adults are excluded under Article 1E and none of the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection under ss.96-97 IRPA.

Citation
MB9-16431
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Reasons and Decision by Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision. Adult appellants excluded under Article 1E and none of the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Third Country Permanent Residence (zeng)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Article 1 E Exclusion Convention Refugee Status Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Third Country Permanent Residence (zeng)

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Reasons and Decision by Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the adult appellants are excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention due to status in Brazil and voluntary loss of that status
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in applying Canada v. Zeng to find exclusion
  3. 3 Whether the appellants established Convention refugee status or need for protection under s.96 and s.97 IRPA with respect to Haiti

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD affirms the RPD: the adult appellants had permanent resident status in Brazil, voluntarily lost that status by remaining outside Brazil for over two years without showing persecution there, the discrimination alleged did not amount to persecution, material omissions in the BOC undermined credibility regarding risk in Haiti, and therefore the adults are excluded under Article 1E and none of the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection under ss.96-97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision. Adult appellants excluded under Article 1E and none of the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; Refugee Appeal Division confirms the Refugee Protection Division determination that the adult appellants are persons referred to in Article 1E of the 1951 Convention and that none of the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.