MB9-01957

MB9-01957

The RAD dismissed the appeal because it found the RPD's credibility concerns and findings justified, admitted the proffered new evidence but gave it low weight, and concluded that the appellants failed to prove a serious risk of persecution (including FGM) that would preclude internal relocation; Lagos is a viable IFA that mitigates any minimal risk, so appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA.

Citation
MB9-01957
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (spouse): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellants (names Redacted): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent Minister: Minister of Immigration (Canada); Designated Representative for Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal Heard by Refugee Appeal Division; Decision Issued
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision of December 21, 2018 confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence, Standard of Review, Country Conditions Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law International Protection Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Credibility Assessment +3 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellants (names Redacted)

Minister of Immigration (Canada)

Respondent Minister

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative for Appellants

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal Heard by Refugee Appeal Division; Decision Issued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether minor appellants face a serious risk of FGM
  3. 3 Whether documents filed under Rule 29/ s.110(4) IRPA are admissible

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal because it found the RPD's credibility concerns and findings justified, admitted the proffered new evidence but gave it low weight, and concluded that the appellants failed to prove a serious risk of persecution (including FGM) that would preclude internal relocation; Lagos is a viable IFA that mitigates any minimal risk, so appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision of December 21, 2018 confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed