VB9-08119

VB9-08119

The RAD dismissed the appeal and confirmed the RPD decision under paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA because no new evidence justified an oral hearing, the appellants failed to discharge their burden to show that internal flight alternatives were not viable, the RPD's finding of a viable IFA in Benin City is supported on the record (whereas Kano was erroneously treated as viable), and credibility concerns including an unreliable affidavit and unexplained failure to obtain available police/medical records justified drawing adverse inferences.

Citation
VB9-08119
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent/minister: Minister of Immigration
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Decision (final Disposition)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Burden of Proof, Oral Hearing Jurisdiction
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Burden of Proof Oral Hearing Jurisdiction

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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister of Immigration

Respondent/minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Decision (final Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RAD should grant an oral hearing absent new evidence
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility findings (including credibility of an uncle's affidavit)
  3. 3 Whether appellants failed to obtain/document police and medical reports and whether that failure affects credibility

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal and confirmed the RPD decision under paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA because no new evidence justified an oral hearing, the appellants failed to discharge their burden to show that internal flight alternatives were not viable, the RPD's finding of a viable IFA in Benin City is supported on the record (whereas Kano was erroneously treated as viable), and credibility concerns including an unreliable affidavit and unexplained failure to obtain available police/medical records justified drawing adverse inferences.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA

Orders

  • Oral hearing request denied (no new evidence)
  • Appeal dismissed