TB9-11325

TB9-11325

The appeal is dismissed because the Appellants failed to meet their burden to provide sufficient credible and admissible evidence to establish a well‑founded fear of persecution under section 96 or the higher threshold for protection under section 97; the new evidence (fatwa letter and affidavit) was either not shown to arise after the RPD decision or not reasonably unavailable and therefore inadmissible under s.110(4); counsel's late submissions were not determinative though accepted onto the record; an oral hearing was not warranted; objective country evidence and facts showed Christianity in Lagos/Ogun is not subject to persecution and an internal flight alternative existed; RPD...

Citation
TB9-11325
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Principal Appellant (alternate Name): XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX); Associate Appellant (wife): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (mother): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant (child): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant (child, US Born): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, New Evidence Admissibility, Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, Bias, Sur Place Claim, Best Interests of the Child
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection New Evidence Admissibility Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative +3 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX)

Principal Appellant (alternate Name)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (wife)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (mother)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant (child)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant (child, US Born)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Appellants are Convention refugees under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether Appellants are persons in need of protection under section 97 of IRPA
  3. 3 Admissibility of new evidence under subsection 110(4) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the Appellants failed to meet their burden to provide sufficient credible and admissible evidence to establish a well‑founded fear of persecution under section 96 or the higher threshold for protection under section 97; the new evidence (fatwa letter and affidavit) was either not shown to arise after the RPD decision or not reasonably unavailable and therefore inadmissible under s.110(4); counsel's late submissions were not determinative though accepted onto the record; an oral hearing was not warranted; objective country evidence and facts showed Christianity in Lagos/Ogun is not subject to persecution and an internal flight alternative existed; RPD...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act