MC3-00694

MC3-00694

The appeal is dismissed because, on independent assessment, the RPD was correct that the appellants have viable internal flight alternatives in Bengaluru and Mumbai; the applicants failed to establish that state or non-state actors had sufficient motivation or means to locate them in those IFAs, the proffered documents did not meet the statutory test for new evidence, and gender-related harms did not render relocation objectively unreasonable.

Citation
MC3-00694
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Decision (written Reasons)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision affirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution, New Evidence Admissibility, State Protection, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Tenant Verification and Surveillance, Credibility and Corroboration
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based Persecution New Evidence Admissibility State Protection +3 more

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division / Appeal Decision (written Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Protection Division correctly found that viable internal flight alternatives (Bengaluru and Mumbai) existed
  2. 2 Whether the RPD properly applied the Gender Guidelines in assessing IFA given alleged rape and psychological harm
  3. 3 Whether the three documents tendered on appeal qualify as new evidence or legal doctrine

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because, on independent assessment, the RPD was correct that the appellants have viable internal flight alternatives in Bengaluru and Mumbai; the applicants failed to establish that state or non-state actors had sufficient motivation or means to locate them in those IFAs, the proffered documents did not meet the statutory test for new evidence, and gender-related harms did not render relocation objectively unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision affirmed

Orders

  • The Refugee Protection Division decision dated November 21, 2022 is confirmed; the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection