TC2-25094

TC2-25094

The RAD dismissed the appeal: the RPD was correct that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection because the appellants have viable internal flight alternatives in Kolkata, New Delhi, Mumbai and Lucknow; the post‑decision evidence was not new or credible and was excluded; on balance of probabilities the appellants would not face a serious possibility of persecution or other protected risks in those IFAs and relocation there would be objectively reasonable.

Citation
TC2-25094
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 March 2022
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Determination, Admissibility of New Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Determination Admissibility of New Evidence Credibility Assessment +1 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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether new evidence is admissible before the RAD
  2. 2 Whether appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether appellants have a viable internal flight alternative (IFA)

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal: the RPD was correct that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection because the appellants have viable internal flight alternatives in Kolkata, New Delhi, Mumbai and Lucknow; the post‑decision evidence was not new or credible and was excluded; on balance of probabilities the appellants would not face a serious possibility of persecution or other protected risks in those IFAs and relocation there would be objectively reasonable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
  • No oral hearing ordered; new evidence not admitted