MA7-06339

MA7-06339

The claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that it would be unreasonable to relocate to another part of Haiti (Jérémie) or that he faced a serious possibility of persecution there on a Convention ground; therefore an internal flight alternative exists and the refugee protection claim fails under s.96 and s.97(1) IRPA.

Citation
MA7-06339
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXXXX; Claimant (minor): XXXXXXX XXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa S.96 & S.97(1)) / Hearing and Decision (oral Hearing)
Outcome
Claim dismissed — claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Status, Internal Flight Alternative, Burden of Proof, Political Opinion, Political Participation, Relocation, Country Conditions (haiti)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Convention Refugee Status Internal Flight Alternative Burden of Proof Political Opinion Political Participation Relocation +1 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXX XXXXXX

Claimant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa S.96 & S.97(1)) / Hearing and Decision (oral Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative (IFA) exists

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that it would be unreasonable to relocate to another part of Haiti (Jérémie) or that he faced a serious possibility of persecution there on a Convention ground; therefore an internal flight alternative exists and the refugee protection claim fails under s.96 and s.97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed — claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under IRPA

Orders

  • Claim denied; not a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA and not a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA dated January 22, 2010
  • Decision notes claimant did not present evidence against the United States