TB9-02808

TB9-02808

Admitted new evidence on appeal demonstrated, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellants' agents of harm possess the means and motivation to locate them across Nigeria including Port Harcourt; that defeats the IFA on the first prong; combined with established nexus (religion and particular social group) and lack of operational state protection, appellants face a serious possibility of persecution and are Convention refugees.

Citation
TB9-02808
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Female Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Male Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Appellants: Mbong Elvira Akinyemi; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Minister: N/A
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / RAD Hearing and Substituted Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm/c), State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Female Genital Mutilation (fgm/c) State Protection Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Determination

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Female Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Male Appellant

Mbong Elvira Akinyemi

Counsel for the Appellants

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / RAD Hearing and Substituted Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Port Harcourt is a viable Internal Flight Alternative (IFA)
  2. 2 Admissibility of new evidence under RAD Rule 29 and ss.110(4) and 110(6) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether appellants have nexus to a Convention ground (religion and particular social group)

Ratio Decidendi

Admitted new evidence on appeal demonstrated, on a balance of probabilities, that the appellants' agents of harm possess the means and motivation to locate them across Nigeria including Port Harcourt; that defeats the IFA on the first prong; combined with established nexus (religion and particular social group) and lack of operational state protection, appellants face a serious possibility of persecution and are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Substitute decision: Appellants declared Convention refugees pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(b)