VB9-03519

VB9-03519

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD correctly found that although the appellant would likely face discrimination in Lebanon as a Palestinian, the discrimination, given the appellant's individual circumstances (age, education, employment intentions) and available UNRWA services, does not rise to the level of...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
VB9-03519
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Persecution, Discrimination, Country of Reference, Assessment of Risk
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Statelessness Persecution Discrimination Country of Reference Assessment of Risk

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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether treatment the appellant would face if returned to Lebanon amounts to persecution
  2. 2 Whether the RPD failed to consider systemic discrimination against Palestinian refugees in Lebanon and the appellant's individual circumstances including age
  3. 3 Whether new evidence was submitted under s.110(4) IRPA and whether an oral hearing was required

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD correctly found that although the appellant would likely face discrimination in Lebanon as a Palestinian, the discrimination, given the appellant's individual circumstances (age, education, employment intentions) and available UNRWA services, does not rise to the level of persecution; no new evidence was submitted under s.110(4) IRPA and the RPD's conclusion that the appellant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 is confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA

Orders

  • RPD decision that the appellant is neither a refugee nor a person in need of protection is confirmed; appeal dismissed