TA7-02334

TA7-02334

The panel found that Mexico City constitutes an available and reasonable internal flight alternative because documentary and contextual evidence establish adequate state protection and remedies in the Federal District and, given the claimant's circumstances (education and prior stay in Mexico City), relocation would not be unduly harsh; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment and the claim fails.

Citation
TA7-02334
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection / Decision (reasons and Decision Issued)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Sexual Orientation, State Protection, Persecution, Risk of Torture
Source Language
English
Refugee Protection Immigration Human Rights Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Sexual Orientation State Protection Persecution +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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection / Decision (reasons and Decision Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an internal flight alternative (Mexico City) is available to the claimant
  2. 2 Whether state protection in Mexico City is adequate for an effeminate homosexual male
  3. 3 Whether the claimant faces a serious possibility of persecution, torture, risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment if returned

Ratio Decidendi

The panel found that Mexico City constitutes an available and reasonable internal flight alternative because documentary and contextual evidence establish adequate state protection and remedies in the Federal District and, given the claimant's circumstances (education and prior stay in Mexico City), relocation would not be unduly harsh; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment and the claim fails.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee claim rejected; no protection granted.