TB6-10076

TB6-10076

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the Appellant failed, on the required standard, to rebut the presumption of state protection for Hungary: credibility findings (including failure to identify perpetrators to police) were upheld, the psychological report did not alter the conclusion that state protection was...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TB6-10076
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credibility Findings, Internal Flight Alternative, Standard of Review, Admission of New Evidence, Psychological Report
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law State Protection Credibility Findings Internal Flight Alternative Standard of Review Admission of New Evidence +1 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 4 Authorities cited 12 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 / Refugee Appeal Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellant is a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether new evidence should be admitted and a new hearing ordered
  3. 3 Whether the presumption of state protection was rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD because the Appellant failed, on the required standard, to rebut the presumption of state protection for Hungary: credibility findings (including failure to identify perpetrators to police) were upheld, the psychological report did not alter the conclusion that state protection was available, and the limited new evidence was inadmissible or immaterial; accordingly the RPD's decision that the Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor person in need of protection was confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA the Refugee Appeal Division confirms the RPD determination that the Appellant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection