MB9-05047

MB9-05047

The appeal was dismissed because the proffered new evidence failed s.110(4) IRPA admissibility criteria, the adult appellants did not establish an objectively founded fear or causal nexus to supernatural harms, and the minor appellant had a viable Internal Flight Alternative in Lagos under the Rasaratnam two-prong test; the RPD did not err in law or in motive and its decision is correct.

Citation
MB9-05047
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Review of RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Refugee Protection, Credibility and Objective Basis of Fear, New Evidence Admissibility S.110(4) IRPA, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) and Cultural Practices, Freedom of Religion
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Refugee Protection Credibility and Objective Basis of Fear New Evidence Admissibility S.110(4) IRPA +2 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 6 Authorities cited 8 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 XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Review of RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA
  2. 2 Whether adult appellants established an objectively founded fear of persecution
  3. 3 Whether the RPD made an impermissible veiled implausibility finding

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the proffered new evidence failed s.110(4) IRPA admissibility criteria, the adult appellants did not establish an objectively founded fear or causal nexus to supernatural harms, and the minor appellant had a viable Internal Flight Alternative in Lagos under the Rasaratnam two-prong test; the RPD did not err in law or in motive and its decision is correct.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Dismiss appeal and confirm RPD decision pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA
  • Reject Exhibits A-F as new evidence as inadmissible under s.110(4) IRPA