MB4-00640

MB4-00640

The RAD dismissed the appeal because the documents were not new evidence under s.110(4), there was no basis to hold a hearing under s.110(6), and the RPD's adverse credibility finding—based on passport evidence, inconsistencies, lack of corroboration and delay—was reasonable and within a range of acceptable outcomes.

Citation
MB4-00640
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 April 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad) / Appeal Decision (rad Confirms Rpd)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of Evidence, Standard of Review, Hearing Request, New Evidence (s.110(4)), Refugee Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of Evidence Standard of Review Hearing Request New Evidence (s.110(4)) +1 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad) / Appeal Decision (rad Confirms Rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the RPD err in its assessment of the appellant's credibility?
  2. 2 Were the documents admissible as new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA?
  3. 3 Should the RAD hold a hearing under s.110(6) IRPA based on the evidence?

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal because the documents were not new evidence under s.110(4), there was no basis to hold a hearing under s.110(6), and the RPD's adverse credibility finding—based on passport evidence, inconsistencies, lack of corroboration and delay—was reasonable and within a range of acceptable outcomes.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; RPD determination that appellant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA is confirmed