MC1-09371

MC1-09371

On correctness review the RAD found the RPD did not err: applicants failed to prove police motivation or capability to track them to Mumbai or Kolkata (CCTNS/tenant systems unlikely to include them), and relocation was not objectively unreasonable given employment prospects, language, and no heightened COVID risk; therefore proposed IFAs are viable and appellants do not qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Citation
MC1-09371
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 May 2022
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Reasons and Decision (appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision of October 10, 2021 confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Refugee Protection, Standard of Review, New Evidence, COVID 19 Risk Assessment, Police Databases/cctns
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Refugee Protection Standard of Review New Evidence COVID 19 Risk Assessment Police Databases/cctns

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Reasons and Decision (appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Viability of Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) in Mumbai and Kolkata
  2. 2 Whether police are motivated to pursue the appellants
  3. 3 Whether police have the means (CCTNS/tenant verification) to locate appellants

Ratio Decidendi

On correctness review the RAD found the RPD did not err: applicants failed to prove police motivation or capability to track them to Mumbai or Kolkata (CCTNS/tenant systems unlikely to include them), and relocation was not objectively unreasonable given employment prospects, language, and no heightened COVID risk; therefore proposed IFAs are viable and appellants do not qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision of October 10, 2021 confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated October 10, 2021 confirmed