TB7-16802

TB7-16802

The RAD upheld the RPD's credibility finding that the appellants' evidence that the uncle held a high police/state role was not credible and, given recent country documentation demonstrating police corruption and ineffectiveness, concluded there was only a mere possibility of detection in Port Harcourt; Port Harcourt therefore constituted a safe and reasonable internal flight alternative, the psychological report was not determinative and new evidence was inadmissible, so the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
TB7-16802
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Female Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Male Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal Confirming RPD Negative Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Standard of Review, Psychological Evidence, Female Genital Mutilation
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Gender Based Violence Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence Standard of Review +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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Female Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Male Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal Confirming RPD Negative Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Port Harcourt constitutes a safe internal flight alternative (IFA) for the appellants
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in disbelieving the appellants' claim that the uncle held a high police/state position
  3. 3 Whether the RPD failed to consider the psychological report and whether it is determinative

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD upheld the RPD's credibility finding that the appellants' evidence that the uncle held a high police/state role was not credible and, given recent country documentation demonstrating police corruption and ineffectiveness, concluded there was only a mere possibility of detection in Port Harcourt; Port Harcourt therefore constituted a safe and reasonable internal flight alternative, the psychological report was not determinative and new evidence was inadmissible, so the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed under s.111(1)(a) IRPA
  • Proposed new affidavit and passport evidence rejected as inadmissible (not relevant to Port Harcourt IFA)