TB8-30568

TB8-30568

New evidence (affidavit and family statements) was admissible, but on independent review the RAD found the RPD correctly concluded Mexico City is a viable internal flight alternative because appellants failed to show on a balance of probabilities that the Gulf Cartel has means or motivation to find them in Mexico City and they did not prove relocation would be unduly harsh; Gender Guidelines were adequately considered; therefore appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB8-30568
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Common Law Spouse: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution, Admissibility of New Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Asylum Law Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based Persecution Admissibility of New Evidence Credibility Assessment Standard of Review

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 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Common Law Spouse

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal Decision (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether new evidence on appeal is admissible
  2. 2 Whether the RPD properly applied Chairperson Guidelines 4 (Gender Guidelines)
  3. 3 Whether there is a viable internal flight alternative in Mexico City

Ratio Decidendi

New evidence (affidavit and family statements) was admissible, but on independent review the RAD found the RPD correctly concluded Mexico City is a viable internal flight alternative because appellants failed to show on a balance of probabilities that the Gulf Cartel has means or motivation to find them in Mexico City and they did not prove relocation would be unduly harsh; Gender Guidelines were adequately considered; therefore appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the IRPA