TB8-29547

TB8-29547

The appeal is dismissed because on a balance of probabilities the appellants could reasonably relocate to Abuja or Port Harcourt; the RPD did not err in admitting the new affidavits or in applying the Gender Guidelines, and the appellants failed to show the identified IFAs were unsuitable or that general criminality or gender discrimination amounted to persecution.

Citation
TB8-29547
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (female): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (male): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision of Refugee Appeal Division (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the RPD confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Findings, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Admissibility of New Evidence, Application of Gender Guidelines
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Gender Based Violence Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Findings Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Admissibility of New Evidence +1 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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (female)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (male)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision of Refugee Appeal Division (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants have a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) in Abuja or Port Harcourt
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in assessing credibility of the appellants
  3. 3 Admissibility and significance of new affidavits under s.110(4) and Singh factors

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because on a balance of probabilities the appellants could reasonably relocate to Abuja or Port Harcourt; the RPD did not err in admitting the new affidavits or in applying the Gender Guidelines, and the appellants failed to show the identified IFAs were unsuitable or that general criminality or gender discrimination amounted to persecution.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the RPD confirmed

Orders

  • Confirm decision of the Refugee Protection Division that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act