TA6-12330

TA6-12330

On the balance of probabilities the panel found an internal flight alternative existed in Abuja and in parts of Lagos and that relocation there would be reasonable given available supports and family circumstances; therefore claimants did not establish Convention refugee status nor need for protection under IRPA sections 96 and 97.

Citation
TA6-12330
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Designated Representative: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Counsel for Claimant: Kingsley Jesuorobo; Counsel for Minister: NA; Panel Member: Harvey Savage
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Convention Refugee / Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection under IRPA sections 96 and 97(1)(a),(b).
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation, Internal Flight Alternative, Membership of Particular Social Group, Persecution by Family Members, Protection Under IRPA Section 97, Country of Origin Information
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Gender Based Violence Law Female Genital Mutilation Internal Flight Alternative Membership of Particular Social Group Persecution by Family Members +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Designated Representative

Kingsley Jesuorobo

Counsel for Claimant

NA

Counsel for Minister

Harvey Savage

Panel Member

Procedural Posture

Convention Refugee / Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are members of a particular social group and face a well-founded fear of persecution
  2. 2 Whether claimants face risk to life, torture or cruel and unusual treatment within meaning of IRPA s.97
  3. 3 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) exists in Nigeria (Abuja or parts of Lagos)

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the panel found an internal flight alternative existed in Abuja and in parts of Lagos and that relocation there would be reasonable given available supports and family circumstances; therefore claimants did not establish Convention refugee status nor need for protection under IRPA sections 96 and 97.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection under IRPA sections 96 and 97(1)(a),(b).

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; no protection granted