MB9-12495

MB9-12495

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD properly applied the IFA two‑prong test and reasonably concluded that the appellants failed to show, on a balance of probabilities, that the alleged agent of harm had the means and motivation to find and harm them in Ibadan and that relocation to Ibadan would be objectively unreasonable; adverse credibility findings and lack of corroborative objective evidence justified confirmation that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
MB9-12495
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative (ifa), Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination, Burden of Proof, Country Documentation
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative (ifa) Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Determination Burden of Proof Country Documentation

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 7 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

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable internal flight alternative exists in Ibadan
  2. 2 Whether the RPD's adverse credibility findings were justified
  3. 3 Whether relocation to Ibadan is objectively reasonable in all the circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD properly applied the IFA two‑prong test and reasonably concluded that the appellants failed to show, on a balance of probabilities, that the alleged agent of harm had the means and motivation to find and harm them in Ibadan and that relocation to Ibadan would be objectively unreasonable; adverse credibility findings and lack of corroborative objective evidence justified confirmation that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision of May 28, 2019 confirmed: appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.