TC3-00431

TC3-00431

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD was correct: the Appellants' credibility is undermined by unexplained delays and re‑availment to Mexico and they failed to establish a nexus or motivation for continued targeted persecution; Campeche constitutes a safe and reasonable internal flight alternative, so they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TC3-00431
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; First Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Second Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Third Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Fourth Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 May 2023
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on RAD Appeal Following RPD Refusal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(a)
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Assessment, Re Availment, Delay in Claiming, Convention Refugee Determination, Humanitarian and Compassionate Grounds, Admissibility of New Evidence, Oral Hearing Discretion
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Assessment Re Availment Delay in Claiming Convention Refugee Determination +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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

First Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Second Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Third Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Fourth Associate Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on RAD Appeal Following RPD Refusal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether Campeche constitutes a valid internal flight alternative (IFA)
  3. 3 Whether Appellants' credibility is undermined by delay and re-availment

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RPD was correct: the Appellants' credibility is undermined by unexplained delays and re‑availment to Mexico and they failed to establish a nexus or motivation for continued targeted persecution; Campeche constitutes a safe and reasonable internal flight alternative, so they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed pursuant to IRPA s.111(1)(a)

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed pursuant to Immigration and Refugee Protection Act s.111(1)(a)