MB4-04050

MB4-04050

The RAD confirmed the RPD: reliable US court and police records and the appellant's sentence demonstrate equivalence to Canadian assault with a weapon (Criminal Code s.267) and, given the mode of prosecution, penalty and surrounding facts (ramming the victim's car repeatedly, victim was former spouse), there are serious reasons for considering the appellant committed a serious non-political crime outside Canada; the appellant failed to produce objective evidence to rebut his conviction; therefore exclusion under Article 1F(b) applies and the refugee claim is rejected.

Citation
MB4-04050
Parties
Appellant: XXXXXXX; Intervening Party/respondent: Minister of Public Safety of Canada
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed; appellant excluded under Article 1F(b) of the Refugee Convention and not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection under IRPA
Legal Topics
Exclusion Clause Article 1 F(b), Convention Refugee Status, Credibility Assessment, Equivalence of Foreign Offence to Canadian Law, Serious Non Political Crime, Standard of Review and Deference, Adequacy of Reasons
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Criminal Law International Law Exclusion Clause Article 1 F(b) Convention Refugee Status Credibility Assessment +4 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 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXX

Appellant

Minister of Public Safety of Canada

Intervening Party/respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are serious reasons for considering the appellant committed a serious non-political crime outside Canada under Article 1F(b)
  2. 2 Whether the US conviction is equivalent to assault with a weapon under section 267 of the Criminal Code (seriousness assessment)
  3. 3 Whether the RPD properly weighed documentary evidence over the appellant's sworn testimony and whether the presumption of truthfulness was rebutted

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: reliable US court and police records and the appellant's sentence demonstrate equivalence to Canadian assault with a weapon (Criminal Code s.267) and, given the mode of prosecution, penalty and surrounding facts (ramming the victim's car repeatedly, victim was former spouse), there are serious reasons for considering the appellant committed a serious non-political crime outside Canada; the appellant failed to produce objective evidence to rebut his conviction; therefore exclusion under Article 1F(b) applies and the refugee claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Determination of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed