VA9-02635

VA9-02635

The claims fail because on the evidence there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture or risk to life outside a five-hour radius of XXXXX and a viable internal flight alternative exists (notably Mexico City), making it reasonable for the claimants to seek refuge there; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
VA9-02635
Parties
Claimant: Mr. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Associate Claimant: Ms. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimants: Minor claimants (named in file)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Oral Decision Rendered With Written Reasons to Follow (final Determination)
Outcome
Claims dismissed; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Persecution, Torture, Risk to Life, Cruel and Unusual Treatment, State Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Persecution Torture Risk to Life Cruel and Unusual Treatment +1 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Ms. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Associate Claimant

Minor claimants (named in file)

Minor Claimants

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Oral Decision Rendered With Written Reasons to Follow (final Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether claimants face a risk of torture or risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment if returned to Mexico
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection exists

Ratio Decidendi

The claims fail because on the evidence there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture or risk to life outside a five-hour radius of XXXXX and a viable internal flight alternative exists (notably Mexico City), making it reasonable for the claimants to seek refuge there; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Children's claims against the United States dismissed for lack of evidence
  • Claims under sections 96 and 97 dismissed due to viable internal flight alternative