Alfredo Garcia

The applicants sought judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) decision confirming the Refugee Protection Division's (RPD) rejection of their claims for refugee protection.

The RAD found no breach of procedural fairness despite the applicants proceeding without counsel and alleging inadequate interpretation, noting they never requested counsel and failed to identify material translation errors.

The RAD also upheld the RPD's negative credibility findings based on significant omissions in the Basis of Claim Forms.

The Federal Court held the RAD's decision was reasonable and dismissed the application for judicial review.

The applicants, citizens of Mexico, sought judicial review of a RAD decision confirming the RPD's rejection of their refugee protection claim.

The RAD refused to admit new medical and parole documents submitted on appeal, finding they were reasonably available prior to the RPD hearing.

The RAD also upheld the RPD's finding that the principal applicant was not credible due to lack of corroborating evidence regarding complaints to authorities, implausible delays, and behaviour inconsistent with an alleged subjective fear.

The Federal Court found the RAD's decision on both the new evidence and credibility to be reasonable, and dismissed the application for judicial review.