TC0-10710

TC0-10710

The RAD found that although some new documents were admitted, the new evidence did not raise credibility issues or meet s.110(6) for an oral hearing; on review the determinative issue was IFA and, on the balance of probabilities, viable IFAs exist in Delhi, Bangalore or Hyderabad and relocation would not be unreasonable; therefore the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TC0-10710
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Spouse: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Minor Child (designated Representative Male Appellant): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 June 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under Irpa) / Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, New Evidence (s.110 Irpa), Rule 29 RAD Rules, Convention Refugee Definition
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Credibility New Evidence (s.110 Irpa) Rule 29 RAD Rules Convention Refugee Definition

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Spouse

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Minor Child (designated Representative Male Appellant)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under Irpa) / Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA and Rule 29
  2. 2 Whether s.110(6) hearing should be granted
  3. 3 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) exists in India

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found that although some new documents were admitted, the new evidence did not raise credibility issues or meet s.110(6) for an oral hearing; on review the determinative issue was IFA and, on the balance of probabilities, viable IFAs exist in Delhi, Bangalore or Hyderabad and relocation would not be unreasonable; therefore the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed
  • Request for an oral hearing under s.110(6) IRPA denied