TB5-06206

TB5-06206

The RAD independently reviewed the record and concluded on the balance of probabilities that a viable Internal Flight Alternative existed in Pakistan for the appellants; the new evidence submitted on appeal was inadmissible or unpersuasive; therefore the RPD's decision was supportable and is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
TB5-06206
Parties
Appellant (principal): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX)XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX XXXX)XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)XXXX; Appellants: Spouse and minor children (names redacted); Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division After Refugee Protection Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Definition, Admissibility of Evidence on Appeal, Standard of Review / Role of RAD, Credibility Findings
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Definition Admissibility of Evidence on Appeal Standard of Review / Role of RAD Credibility Findings

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 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX)XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX XXXX)XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX(a.k.a.XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)XXXX

Appellant (principal)

Spouse and minor children (names redacted)

Appellants

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division After Refugee Protection Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) exists within Pakistan for the appellants
  2. 2 Admissibility of new evidence filed on appeal under s.110(4) IRPA
  3. 3 Appropriate standard of review and scope of RAD's assessment of RPD decision

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD independently reviewed the record and concluded on the balance of probabilities that a viable Internal Flight Alternative existed in Pakistan for the appellants; the new evidence submitted on appeal was inadmissible or unpersuasive; therefore the RPD's decision was supportable and is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA the decision of the Refugee Protection Division is confirmed
  • The appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection