2023 RLLR 44

2023 RLLR 44

The claimants were found credible, established nexus to a Convention ground (membership of a particular social group), demonstrated an objective and well‑founded fear of persecution by the CJNG, rebutted the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence, and showed no viable internal flight...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2023 RLLR 44
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX (TC2-38416); Associate Claimant: XXXX (TC2-38417); Associate Claimant: XXXX (TC2-38418)
Court
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour Relations
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 November 2023
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (determination)
Outcome
Claimants recognized as Convention refugees; claims accepted.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Persecution, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Particular Social Group, Gender Based Persecution, Cartel Violence, Credibility, Nexus to Convention Grounds
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Asylum Gender Based Violence Criminal Law (organized Crime) Convention Refugee Persecution +7 more

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX (TC2-38416)

Principal Claimant

XXXX (TC2-38417)

Associate Claimant

XXXX (TC2-38418)

Associate Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees under sections 96 and 97(1) of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether there is nexus between the feared harm and a Convention ground (particular social group)
  3. 3 Credibility of claimants' testimony and documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants were found credible, established nexus to a Convention ground (membership of a particular social group), demonstrated an objective and well‑founded fear of persecution by the CJNG, rebutted the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence, and showed no viable internal flight alternative in Mexico; therefore they are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Claimants recognized as Convention refugees; claims accepted.

Orders

  • Claimants recognized as Convention refugees under sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  • No viable internal flight alternative exists in Mexico for these claimants based on the evidence