MB5-05129

MB5-05129

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellant was not credible about his knowledge of his partner's age and dates of sexual activity; the admitted sexual relations with a person under 16 constitute conduct equivalent to sexual interference (s.151 Criminal Code) of sufficient seriousness, and the asserted mitigating factors do not rebut the presumption of seriousness; therefore the appellant is excluded under Article 1F(b) and is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.

Citation
MB5-05129
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent (intervenor): Minister of Public Safety
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Following Federal Court Remittal for Redetermination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed that appellant is excluded under Article 1F(b) and is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Article 1 F(b) Exclusion, Credibility Findings, Sexual Interference (s.151 Criminal Code), Standard of Review, Mitigating and Aggravating Factors
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Criminal Law Administrative Law Article 1 F(b) Exclusion Credibility Findings Sexual Interference (s.151 Criminal Code) Standard of Review +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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Minister of Public Safety

Respondent (intervenor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Following Federal Court Remittal for Redetermination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the appellant's credibility regarding the age of his partner
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in concluding the appellant committed a serious non-political crime attracting exclusion under Article 1F(b)
  3. 3 Whether the appellant's alleged mitigating factors rebut the presumption of seriousness under Jayasekara/Febles

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellant was not credible about his knowledge of his partner's age and dates of sexual activity; the admitted sexual relations with a person under 16 constitute conduct equivalent to sexual interference (s.151 Criminal Code) of sufficient seriousness, and the asserted mitigating factors do not rebut the presumption of seriousness; therefore the appellant is excluded under Article 1F(b) and is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed that appellant is excluded under Article 1F(b) and is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection

Orders

  • Confirm RPD determination rejecting refugee protection claim
  • Dismiss appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division