VB9-01400

VB9-01400

The RAD admits the counselor's letter as new evidence but finds it insufficient to overcome multiple significant credibility defects (notably omission of 2011–2015 Brazil residence and material inconsistencies with the U.S. claim); the RPD's adverse credibility findings concerning fear of father, family and community are confirmed, the RPD's disbelief of the Quranic school allegations is reversed insofar as there is credible corroboration for attendance and abuse, but the compelling reasons exception does not apply and the appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection; appeal denied.

Citation
VB9-01400
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Tribunal Member: Julie Corry; Designated Representative: S.O.; Counsel for Minister: S.O.
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal denied; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed in part and varied in part (credibility of Quranic school attendance acknowledged but not dispositive)
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Oral Hearing Discretion, Compelling Reasons Exception, Corroboration, Country Conditions, Mental Health in Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Oral Hearing Discretion Compelling Reasons Exception Corroboration +2 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Julie Corry

Tribunal Member

S.O.

Designated Representative

S.O.

Counsel for Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the appellant's credibility
  2. 2 Whether new evidence from the appellant's counselor is admissible and material
  3. 3 Whether an oral hearing should be held under s.110(6) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD admits the counselor's letter as new evidence but finds it insufficient to overcome multiple significant credibility defects (notably omission of 2011–2015 Brazil residence and material inconsistencies with the U.S. claim); the RPD's adverse credibility findings concerning fear of father, family and community are confirmed, the RPD's disbelief of the Quranic school allegations is reversed insofar as there is credible corroboration for attendance and abuse, but the compelling reasons exception does not apply and the appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection; appeal denied.

Court Disposition

Appeal denied; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed in part and varied in part (credibility of Quranic school attendance acknowledged but not dispositive)

Orders

  • Appeal denied
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed