TC0-06171

TC0-06171

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found the RPD correctly concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that Baghdad constitutes a viable internal flight alternative for the appellants (first prong: no serious possibility of persecution there; second prong: relocation is not objectively unreasonable given family ties, residence and economic factors) and the Associate Appellant is not excluded under article 1F(a); admitted new evidence did not alter these conclusions.

Citation
TC0-06171
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (Principal Appellant); Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (Associate Appellant); Appellant Daughter: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (XXXX)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Exclusion Under Article 1 F(a), New Evidence Admissibility, Credibility, Procedural Joinder
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law International Law Internal Flight Alternative Exclusion Under Article 1 F(a) New Evidence Admissibility Credibility Procedural Joinder

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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (Principal Appellant)

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (Associate Appellant)

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (XXXX)

Appellant Daughter

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Viability of internal flight alternative (Baghdad)
  2. 2 Whether Associate Appellant is excluded under article 1F(a)
  3. 3 Admissibility of new evidence on appeal

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found the RPD correctly concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that Baghdad constitutes a viable internal flight alternative for the appellants (first prong: no serious possibility of persecution there; second prong: relocation is not objectively unreasonable given family ties, residence and economic factors) and the Associate Appellant is not excluded under article 1F(a); admitted new evidence did not alter these conclusions.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision of February 19, 2020 confirmed
  • No oral hearing ordered