MA9-07107

MA9-07107

Claimant failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that he would face a risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment throughout Mexico and failed to show it would be objectively unreasonable to relocate to suggested locations (Monterrey, Oaxaca, Veracruz); therefore internal flight alternative exists and the refugee protection claim is rejected.

Citation
MA9-07107
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Sections 96 and 97) / Decision at Refugee Protection Division (final)
Outcome
Refugee protection claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Sections 96 and 97) / Decision at Refugee Protection Division (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant has nexus to a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether alleged conduct amounted to torture requiring state involvement
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative (IFA) exists

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that he would face a risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment throughout Mexico and failed to show it would be objectively unreasonable to relocate to suggested locations (Monterrey, Oaxaca, Veracruz); therefore internal flight alternative exists and the refugee protection claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 nor a person in need of protection under section 97 of the IRPA