VB9-04129

VB9-04129

The appeal is allowed in part because the RPD failed to adequately assess the second prong of the IFA test for the Principal Appellant by not considering the reasonableness of Port Harcourt for a mother and her two minor children and by assessing employability alone; the matter is remitted to the RPD for a full assessment of the IFA taking into account all relevant factors. The Associate Appellants' appeals are dismissed because the RPD correctly found they have US citizenship and no protection claim against the USA.

Citation
VB9-04129
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision Appeal Allowed in Part; Remitted to RPD for Redetermination for Principal Appellant; Associate Appellants' Appeals Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; Principal Appellant's claim remitted to RPD for redetermination on IFA; Associate Appellants' appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Internal Flight Alternative (ifa), Credibility Assessment, New Evidence Admissibility, Forward Looking Risk Assessment, Remittal to Tribunal
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Gender Based Violence Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Internal Flight Alternative (ifa) Credibility Assessment +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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Decision Appeal Allowed in Part; Remitted to RPD for Redetermination for Principal Appellant; Associate Appellants' Appeals Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD unreasonably assessed the Internal Flight Alternative (second prong) for the Principal Appellant
  2. 2 Whether the RPD's credibility findings were unreasonable
  3. 3 Whether new evidence filed at the RAD stage is admissible

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed in part because the RPD failed to adequately assess the second prong of the IFA test for the Principal Appellant by not considering the reasonableness of Port Harcourt for a mother and her two minor children and by assessing employability alone; the matter is remitted to the RPD for a full assessment of the IFA taking into account all relevant factors. The Associate Appellants' appeals are dismissed because the RPD correctly found they have US citizenship and no protection claim against the USA.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; Principal Appellant's claim remitted to RPD for redetermination on IFA; Associate Appellants' appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • Allow appeal in part and remit Principal Appellant's claim to the Refugee Protection Division for redetermination of the second prong of the IFA test taking into account the mother and her minor children
  • Dismiss the appeals of the Associate Appellants