MC1-05466

MC1-05466

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD correctly determined that the appellants did not establish a serious possibility of persecution in the proposed IFAs (New Delhi or Kolkata); there is no persuasive evidence that 'B' or the BJP, or the police, are motivated and able to locate and persecute them in those locations, and the RPD's failure to consider NDP item 10.13 was an error of omission that was not material to the outcome.

Citation
MC1-05466
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Appeal Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; Refugee Protection Division decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Status, Risk Assessment, New Evidence (ndp)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Status Risk Assessment New Evidence (ndp)

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an internal flight alternative (New Delhi or Kolkata) is viable
  2. 2 Whether agents of persecution (individual 'B' and the BJP) are able or motivated to locate and persecute the appellants in the IFAs
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred by failing to consider updated objective evidence (NDP item 10.13) and whether that error is material

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD correctly determined that the appellants did not establish a serious possibility of persecution in the proposed IFAs (New Delhi or Kolkata); there is no persuasive evidence that 'B' or the BJP, or the police, are motivated and able to locate and persecute them in those locations, and the RPD's failure to consider NDP item 10.13 was an error of omission that was not material to the outcome.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; Refugee Protection Division decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and the RPD decision confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection