TC0-06658

TC0-06658

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings and, in the alternative, found that viable, safe and reasonable internal flight alternatives exist (Abuja, Benin City, Port Harcourt); because the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture/cruel treatment either on the merits or given available IFAs, the appeal is dismissed and the RPD decision is upheld under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
TC0-06658
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (spouse): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Female Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Male Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Determination (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4)), Internal Flight Alternative (ifa), Procedural Fairness, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Tribal/ritual Markings, Failure to Claim in Transit Country
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4)) Internal Flight Alternative (ifa) Procedural Fairness +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Female Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Male Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Determination (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether new evidence filed on appeal is admissible under s.110(4) and Raza/Singh factors
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative exists that is safe and reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's adverse credibility findings and, in the alternative, found that viable, safe and reasonable internal flight alternatives exist (Abuja, Benin City, Port Harcourt); because the appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture/cruel treatment either on the merits or given available IFAs, the appeal is dismissed and the RPD decision is upheld under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Dismiss appeal pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act