MB9-15379

MB9-15379

The RPD decision was correct because the Associate Appellant, as a US citizen, did not present a valid claim against the US and therefore could not be granted asylum in Canada, and the Principal Appellant failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that she faces a serious possibility of persecution or a personal danger of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment from her in‑laws or Nigerian society; past incidents were not shown to amount to persecution nor to create a real future risk.

Citation
MB9-15379
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Reasons for Decision (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Prospective Risk Assessment, Witchcraft Accusations, Widowhood Stigma, Jurisdiction (dual Citizenship)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Gender Based Violence Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Prospective Risk Assessment Witchcraft Accusations +2 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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Reasons for Decision (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Associate Appellant can claim asylum in Canada despite US citizenship
  2. 2 Whether Principal Appellant faces a serious possibility of persecution by her in-laws
  3. 3 Whether Principal Appellant faces persecution or risk of torture/ death/ cruel treatment by Nigerian society or the Yoruba community

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD decision was correct because the Associate Appellant, as a US citizen, did not present a valid claim against the US and therefore could not be granted asylum in Canada, and the Principal Appellant failed to establish on a balance of probabilities that she faces a serious possibility of persecution or a personal danger of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment from her in‑laws or Nigerian society; past incidents were not shown to amount to persecution nor to create a real future risk.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed