VB9-02326

VB9-02326

On independent assessment and correctness standard, the RAD found appellants failed to prove on balance of probabilities that Lagos or Port Harcourt would expose them to a serious possibility of persecution or Section 97(1) harm and that relocation there would be objectively unreasonable; therefore the RPD decision rejecting refugee protection was confirmed and the appeals dismissed. The Minor USA appellant, being a US citizen who made no claim against the USA, is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.

Citation
VB9-02326
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Nigerian Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor USA Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal: Odaro Omonuwa
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 September 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal — Reasons and Decision Dated September 30, 2019
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of IRPA
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Convention Refugee Determination, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Convention Refugee Determination Standard of Review

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Nigerian Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor USA Appellant

Odaro Omonuwa

Counsel for the Persons Who Are the Subject of the Appeal

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal — Reasons and Decision Dated September 30, 2019

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether internal flight alternatives (Lagos and Port Harcourt) are available to the Nigerian appellants
  2. 2 Whether the Minor USA appellant is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection given US citizenship and no claim against the USA
  3. 3 Whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

On independent assessment and correctness standard, the RAD found appellants failed to prove on balance of probabilities that Lagos or Port Harcourt would expose them to a serious possibility of persecution or Section 97(1) harm and that relocation there would be objectively unreasonable; therefore the RPD decision rejecting refugee protection was confirmed and the appeals dismissed. The Minor USA appellant, being a US citizen who made no claim against the USA, is not a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of IRPA

Orders

  • The appeals are dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division is confirmed