MB9-26381

MB9-26381

On independent review the RAD concluded appellants failed to discharge the burden to show Lagos is unsafe or unreasonably harsh as an IFA: objective country evidence did not establish Boko Haram or Fulani herdsmen have the capability to target them in Lagos, risks of crime/kidnapping are general population risks and do not establish personal persecution or risk to life on the required standards, new evidence was not admitted under s.110(4), and the American minor had no claim; therefore the RPD decision rejecting refugee protection is confirmed.

Citation
MB9-26381
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Dated January 23, 2020
Outcome
Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Procedural Fairness, Admissibility of New Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Procedural Fairness Admissibility of New Evidence

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Dated January 23, 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Lagos, Nigeria is a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) for the appellants
  2. 2 Whether Boko Haram or Fulani herdsmen have the means or motivation to find and persecute the appellants in Lagos
  3. 3 Whether risks of crime and kidnapping in Lagos make IFA unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

On independent review the RAD concluded appellants failed to discharge the burden to show Lagos is unsafe or unreasonably harsh as an IFA: objective country evidence did not establish Boko Haram or Fulani herdsmen have the capability to target them in Lagos, risks of crime/kidnapping are general population risks and do not establish personal persecution or risk to life on the required standards, new evidence was not admitted under s.110(4), and the American minor had no claim; therefore the RPD decision rejecting refugee protection is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and decision of Refugee Protection Division dated October 21, 2019 confirmed
  • No referral for redetermination ordered