TB4-03368

TB4-03368

RAD applies a reasonableness standard to RPD findings of fact and credibility, finds the RPD's adverse credibility conclusions defensible given the record (deleted Facebook evidence and lack of corroboration, inconsistent travel/re‑availment, omission of hiding address on forms, and failure to disclose fear at port of entry), and because no new evidence was submitted the RAD must proceed without a hearing and thus confirms the RPD decision dismissing the claims.

Citation
TB4-03368
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Standard of Review, Oral Hearing Under S.110(6) IRPA, Admissibility of New Evidence, Deference to First Instance Tribunal
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Standard of Review Oral Hearing Under S.110(6) IRPA Admissibility of New Evidence Deference to First Instance Tribunal

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether RAD proceedings constitute a de novo rehearing
  2. 2 Appropriate standard of review for RPD findings (fact, mixed, law)
  3. 3 Whether RPD's adverse credibility findings were reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

RAD applies a reasonableness standard to RPD findings of fact and credibility, finds the RPD's adverse credibility conclusions defensible given the record (deleted Facebook evidence and lack of corroboration, inconsistent travel/re‑availment, omission of hiding address on forms, and failure to disclose fear at port of entry), and because no new evidence was submitted the RAD must proceed without a hearing and thus confirms the RPD decision dismissing the claims.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed
  • RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA