MB4-05351

MB4-05351

Because the evidence established a single, non‑targeted criminal assault by an unknown assailant and documentary material did not demonstrate a serious possibility of recurrence for these appellants (who are not camp residents), the RPD reasonably concluded they are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection; no new evidence was before RAD so no hearing was warranted and no palpable and overriding error was found.

Citation
MB4-05351
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Reasons and Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Person in Need of Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Violence, Standard of Appellate Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Person in Need of Protection Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based Violence Standard of Appellate Review

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Reasons and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing prospective risk/objective basis of fear
  2. 2 Whether appellants have an internal flight alternative in Haiti
  3. 3 Whether RAD should hear the appeal in absence of new evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Because the evidence established a single, non‑targeted criminal assault by an unknown assailant and documentary material did not demonstrate a serious possibility of recurrence for these appellants (who are not camp residents), the RPD reasonably concluded they are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection; no new evidence was before RAD so no hearing was warranted and no palpable and overriding error was found.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Determination of the RPD confirmed that the appellants are not Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA