VB8-07350

VB8-07350

The RAD confirmed the RPD's IFA finding: appellants failed to rebut the presumption of a viable IFA in Ibadan or Port Harcourt because objective evidence and personal circumstances showed no serious possibility of persecution or risk to life/torture there and relocation would not be unreasonable; notice of IFA at hearing was adequate; reliance on the Jurisprudential Guide was appropriate and did not violate tribunal independence.

Citation
VB8-07350
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) / Reasons and Decision (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Refugee Protection, Burden of Proof, Administrative Guidance / Jurisprudential Guides
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Refugee Protection Burden of Proof Administrative Guidance / Jurisprudential Guides

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) / Reasons and Decision (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) in Ibadan or Port Harcourt
  2. 2 Whether appellants received sufficient notice that IFA would be raised at hearing
  3. 3 Whether the RPD was required to follow the IRB Jurisprudential Guide and whether reliance on it was permissible

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's IFA finding: appellants failed to rebut the presumption of a viable IFA in Ibadan or Port Harcourt because objective evidence and personal circumstances showed no serious possibility of persecution or risk to life/torture there and relocation would not be unreasonable; notice of IFA at hearing was adequate; reliance on the Jurisprudential Guide was appropriate and did not violate tribunal independence.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed