MB4-02381

MB4-02381

RAD confirmed RPD decision because (1) appellants' problems were criminal in nature and lacked nexus to a Convention ground, (2) although the translator's corrected affidavit was admitted as new evidence, it was not sufficiently material to alter outcome, and (3) credibility findings concerning the implausibility of the alleged conduct by the influential businessman and the appellants' failure to pursue investigations, together with the availability and reasonableness of internal relocation to Islamabad, meant appellants were not persons in need of protection under section 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
MB4-02381
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility, Internal Flight Alternative, Admissibility of New Evidence, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Internal Flight Alternative Admissibility of New Evidence +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 7 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are Convention refugees under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether appellants are persons in need of protection under section 97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Admissibility and materiality of translator's corrected affidavit as new evidence under section 110(4) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

RAD confirmed RPD decision because (1) appellants' problems were criminal in nature and lacked nexus to a Convention ground, (2) although the translator's corrected affidavit was admitted as new evidence, it was not sufficiently material to alter outcome, and (3) credibility findings concerning the implausibility of the alleged conduct by the influential businessman and the appellants' failure to pursue investigations, together with the availability and reasonableness of internal relocation to Islamabad, meant appellants were not persons in need of protection under section 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to section 111(1)(a) IRPA