TC1-08475

TC1-08475

Admitted new evidence but appellants failed to discharge the onus to prove no viable internal flight alternative: the evidence did not establish a serious possibility of persecution by the XXXX cartel in Mexico City nor that relocation there would be unreasonable given supportive family circumstances, country evidence showing improved conditions in large cities for LGBTQ persons, and no medical evidence that relocation would jeopardize health or safety; therefore appeal dismissed.

Citation
TC1-08475
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (spouse): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal: Hart A Kaminker; Counsel for the Minister: N/A
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal Reasons for Decision (final)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, Persecution, Admissibility of New Evidence, In Person Hearing Request
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Persecution Admissibility of New Evidence In Person Hearing Request

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Hart A Kaminker

Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal Reasons for Decision (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants have a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) in Mexico (Mexico City, Guadalajara, Mérida, Mazatlán)
  2. 2 Whether new evidence regarding minor's sexual orientation is admissible and warrants an in-person hearing
  3. 3 Whether appellants have nexus to Convention grounds (imputed political opinion; membership of particular social group)

Ratio Decidendi

Admitted new evidence but appellants failed to discharge the onus to prove no viable internal flight alternative: the evidence did not establish a serious possibility of persecution by the XXXX cartel in Mexico City nor that relocation there would be unreasonable given supportive family circumstances, country evidence showing improved conditions in large cities for LGBTQ persons, and no medical evidence that relocation would jeopardize health or safety; therefore appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; appellants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection