VB8-03508

VB8-03508

The RAD dismissed the appeal because on the balance of probabilities the appellants failed to show there was no safe and reasonable internal flight alternative: the RPD reasonably found the evidence did not establish that the alleged agent(s) of harm were members of an organized crime group with the means or motivation to locate them in Mexico City, and relocation to Mexico City was not unreasonably harsh for the appellants.

Citation
VB8-03508
Parties
Appellant Principal: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellants Associates: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent Minister: Minister of Immigration (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Disposition)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed under section 111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative (ifa), Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination, Burden of Proof, Delay in Making Claim
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative (ifa) Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Determination Burden of Proof Delay in Making Claim

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Principal

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellants Associates

Minister of Immigration (Respondent)

Respondent Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) in Mexico City
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in assessing delay in making the refugee claim and its impact on subjective fear
  3. 3 Whether the appellants established that the agent(s) of harm were members of organized crime with capacity or motivation to locate them in the IFA location

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal because on the balance of probabilities the appellants failed to show there was no safe and reasonable internal flight alternative: the RPD reasonably found the evidence did not establish that the alleged agent(s) of harm were members of an organized crime group with the means or motivation to locate them in Mexico City, and relocation to Mexico City was not unreasonably harsh for the appellants.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed under section 111(1)(a) IRPA