TB9-24828

TB9-24828

The appeal is dismissed because the Appellants failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that the identified agent of persecution currently has the means to locate them in Port Harcourt or Abuja (the proposed IFAs) and failed to show that relocation to those cities would be unreasonable given their personal circumstances; accordingly there is no serious possibility of persecution in those IFA locations and the RPD decision is confirmed.

Citation
TB9-24828
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / RAD Decision Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Status, Persons in Need of Protection, Corruption and State/non State Actors, Standard of Review, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Status Persons in Need of Protection Corruption and State/non State Actors Standard of Review +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / RAD Decision Confirming RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the agent of persecution has the means and motivation to locate the Appellants in proposed IFA locations
  2. 2 Whether viable Internal Flight Alternatives (Port Harcourt or Abuja) exist
  3. 3 Whether relocation to those IFA locations would be unreasonable given Appellants' personal circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the Appellants failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that the identified agent of persecution currently has the means to locate them in Port Harcourt or Abuja (the proposed IFAs) and failed to show that relocation to those cities would be unreasonable given their personal circumstances; accordingly there is no serious possibility of persecution in those IFA locations and the RPD decision is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  • No remittal; RAD confirms that Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection