TC1-16930

TC1-16930

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found no error in the RPD's conclusion that Enugu State is a viable Internal Flight Alternative: appellants failed to prove a real risk of persecution in Enugu (no persuasive evidence that M.B. has the means or motivation to locate them or is affiliated with Islamic Jihad), sur place claim based on Twitter was not established, the RPD did not breach procedural fairness in relying on the updated NDP, and the PA's disclosed PTSD did not make relocation to Enugu unreasonable; therefore the RPD decision refusing refugee protection is confirmed under para 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
TC1-16930
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 February 2022
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Sur Place Claim, Procedural Fairness, National Documentation Package, Gender Based Persecution, New Evidence Admission, Standard of Review, Mental Health Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Internal Flight Alternative Sur Place Claim Procedural Fairness National Documentation Package +4 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 7 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) exists in Enugu State
  2. 2 Whether appellants established a sur place claim based on prior Twitter use
  3. 3 Whether the RPD breached procedural fairness by relying on an updated National Documentation Package (NDP)

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found no error in the RPD's conclusion that Enugu State is a viable Internal Flight Alternative: appellants failed to prove a real risk of persecution in Enugu (no persuasive evidence that M.B. has the means or motivation to locate them or is affiliated with Islamic Jihad), sur place claim based on Twitter was not established, the RPD did not breach procedural fairness in relying on the updated NDP, and the PA's disclosed PTSD did not make relocation to Enugu unreasonable; therefore the RPD decision refusing refugee protection is confirmed under para 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated October 6, 2021 confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA