TA7-11606

TA7-11606

The Board found on the balance of probabilities that Mexico City or Guadalajara constitute realistic, attainable internal flight alternatives where the claimant would not face a serious possibility of persecution and where state protection and services are reasonably available; therefore the claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TA7-11606
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 July 2008
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division Decision)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution, Domestic Violence, State Protection, Convention Refugee Determination
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Family Law Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based Persecution Domestic Violence State Protection +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable internal flight alternative exists in Mexico
  2. 2 Whether claimant faces a serious possibility of persecution on return
  3. 3 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

The Board found on the balance of probabilities that Mexico City or Guadalajara constitute realistic, attainable internal flight alternatives where the claimant would not face a serious possibility of persecution and where state protection and services are reasonably available; therefore the claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

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