VB9-04335

VB9-04335

The claimants fear criminal extortion rather than persecution for a Convention ground and therefore s.96 does not apply; on s.97 the claimants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the armed group had the motivation and means to find them in Cartagena and that relocation there would be unreasonable, so an internal flight alternative exists and the claims must be rejected.

Citation
VB9-04335
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection (s.97), Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Nexus to Convention Ground, Extortion
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection (s.97) Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Nexus to Convention Ground +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees under s.96 of the Act
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97 of the Act
  3. 3 Whether there is nexus between the feared harm and a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants fear criminal extortion rather than persecution for a Convention ground and therefore s.96 does not apply; on s.97 the claimants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that the armed group had the motivation and means to find them in Cartagena and that relocation there would be unreasonable, so an internal flight alternative exists and the claims must be rejected.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • The refugee protection claims of the principal, associate and minor claimants are rejected.