VC0-00455

VC0-00455

Both prongs of the Rasaratnam IFA test are satisfied: on balance of probabilities relinquishing the land removes the agent's motivation to harm, and Campeche City or Merida are reasonable and safe internal flight alternatives supported by objective country evidence; therefore appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the RAD confirms the RPD decision.

Citation
VC0-00455
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, New Evidence (s.110 Irpa), Risk Assessment Under S.97(1) IRPA, Standard of Review, Economic Viability and Extortion Risk
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative New Evidence (s.110 Irpa) Risk Assessment Under S.97(1) IRPA Standard of Review Economic Viability and Extortion Risk

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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether admitted new evidence meets s.110(4) IRPA and Raza/Singh criteria
  2. 2 Whether an Internal Flight Alternative exists in Campeche City or Merida under Rasaratnam two‑prong test
  3. 3 Whether the agent of harm has capacity and motivation to locate and harm appellants in proposed IFAs

Ratio Decidendi

Both prongs of the Rasaratnam IFA test are satisfied: on balance of probabilities relinquishing the land removes the agent's motivation to harm, and Campeche City or Merida are reasonable and safe internal flight alternatives supported by objective country evidence; therefore appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the RAD confirms the RPD decision.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD decision that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(a) the decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated January 6, 2020 is confirmed