TB7-08680

TB7-08680

The RAD confirmed the RPD because it reasonably found the appellant's allegations and conversion claim not credible (fabricated allegations, inconsistent testimony, lack of corroborative baptismal evidence and church activity) and because the appellant's unexplained failure to claim asylum in the United States supports an adverse inference that he lacks subjective fear; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TB7-08680
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal Decision (refugee Appeal Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility, Religious Persecution, Failure to Claim in Safe Third Country, Standard of Review, Conversion to Christianity
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Religious Persecution Failure to Claim in Safe Third Country Standard of Review Conversion to Christianity

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal Decision (refugee Appeal Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether the appellant is a person in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's claim of conversion to Christianity is credible

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD because it reasonably found the appellant's allegations and conversion claim not credible (fabricated allegations, inconsistent testimony, lack of corroborative baptismal evidence and church activity) and because the appellant's unexplained failure to claim asylum in the United States supports an adverse inference that he lacks subjective fear; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act