MB8-12592

MB8-12592

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the two adult appellants hold Brazilian permanent resident status that prima facie provides rights similar to Brazilian citizens, they failed to prove they had lost that status, and adverse credibility findings about their accounts were justified; consequently they are excluded under Article 1E and are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection, and no oral hearing under s.110(6) IRPA was warranted because no new admissible evidence was filed.

Citation
MB8-12592
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed.
Legal Topics
Convention Exclusion Article 1 E, Permanent Resident Status in Third Country, Credibility Findings, Oral Hearing Under Section 110(6) IRPA, Loss of Residency Status
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Exclusion Article 1 E Permanent Resident Status in Third Country Credibility Findings Oral Hearing Under Section 110(6) IRPA Loss of Residency Status

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are excluded from the Refugee Convention under Article 1E due to permanent resident status in Brazil
  2. 2 Whether appellants lost their permanent resident status in Brazil
  3. 3 Whether appellants established a well-founded fear of persecution in Brazil or Haiti

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the two adult appellants hold Brazilian permanent resident status that prima facie provides rights similar to Brazilian citizens, they failed to prove they had lost that status, and adverse credibility findings about their accounts were justified; consequently they are excluded under Article 1E and are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection, and no oral hearing under s.110(6) IRPA was warranted because no new admissible evidence was filed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed.

Orders

  • Confirm exclusion of XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX from application of the Convention under Article 1E
  • Find that appellants are not Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA and not persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA