TC0-11666

TC0-11666

The IFA test fails because, on a balance of probabilities, the founding family of XXXX has the means (national networks, wealth, demonstrated ability to circumvent security) and continuing motivation (to protect and restore reputation after conviction) to locate and harm the appellants in the proposed IFA locations, and state protection is inadequate; therefore no viable IFA exists and the appellants are persons in need of protection.

Citation
TC0-11666
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant (u.s. and Nigeria Dual Citizen): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal Heard by Refugee Appeal Division; Substituted Decision Issued
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the appellants are persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Convention Refugee Determination, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Persecution, Credibility and New Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law (contextual) Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Convention Refugee Determination Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) +2 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant (u.s. and Nigeria Dual Citizen)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Appeal Heard by Refugee Appeal Division; Substituted Decision Issued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) exists in Benin City or Port Harcourt
  2. 2 Whether the founding family of the corporate entity (XXXX) has the means and motivation to locate and harm the appellants nationwide
  3. 3 Whether state protection in Nigeria is adequate

Ratio Decidendi

The IFA test fails because, on a balance of probabilities, the founding family of XXXX has the means (national networks, wealth, demonstrated ability to circumvent security) and continuing motivation (to protect and restore reputation after conviction) to locate and harm the appellants in the proposed IFA locations, and state protection is inadequate; therefore no viable IFA exists and the appellants are persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the appellants are persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Substitute decision: XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX are persons in need of protection