TB9-20827

TB9-20827

The RAD confirmed the RPD decision because the appellants failed to establish that Abuja was not a safe and reasonable internal flight alternative; proposed new evidence was inadmissible under s.110(4) IRPA and Singh/Raza factors; no documentary evidence justified granting an oral hearing under s.110(6); accordingly the RPD's finding that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection was upheld pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
TB9-20827
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spousal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Male Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; First Female Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Second Female Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (reconsideration of RPD Decision)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Admissibility of New Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Gender Based Persecution, Child Claimant Issues, Female Genital Mutilation
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Admissibility of New Evidence Credibility Assessment Gender Based Persecution Child Claimant Issues +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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spousal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Male Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

First Female Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Second Female Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal (reconsideration of RPD Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Abuja constitutes a safe internal flight alternative (IFA) for the appellants
  2. 2 Whether proposed new evidence meets s.110(4) IRPA and is admissible on appeal
  3. 3 Whether the threshold for granting an oral hearing under s.110(6) IRPA is met

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD decision because the appellants failed to establish that Abuja was not a safe and reasonable internal flight alternative; proposed new evidence was inadmissible under s.110(4) IRPA and Singh/Raza factors; no documentary evidence justified granting an oral hearing under s.110(6); accordingly the RPD's finding that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection was upheld pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA, the decision of the Refugee Protection Division is confirmed and the appeals are dismissed.