MB9-27751

MB9-27751

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD's independent analysis concurred with the RPD that the principal appellant's allegations were undermined by material contradictions and omissions and the documentary evidence lacked sufficient reliability; accordingly neither appellant established on the required standard that...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
MB9-27751
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Gender Related Persecution, Particular Social Group, Exclusion, Best Interests of the Child, Documentary Evidence, Oral Hearing
Source Language
english
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Credibility Assessment Gender Related Persecution Particular Social Group Exclusion Best Interests of the Child +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants qualify as Convention refugees under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether appellants are persons in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of the principal appellant's testimony and documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD's independent analysis concurred with the RPD that the principal appellant's allegations were undermined by material contradictions and omissions and the documentary evidence lacked sufficient reliability; accordingly neither appellant established on the required standard that they are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection, and the minor appellant is further undermined by ability to seek protection from her country of nationality (United States).

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed: appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection