MB6-04722

MB6-04722

On correctness review the RAD concluded the RPD did not err: the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he would be persecuted or located by police in Mumbai and failed to show relocation there would be unreasonable; therefore a viable and safe IFA in Mumbai exists and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MB6-04722
Parties
Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 November 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Decision (appeal From Refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative (ifa), Standard of Review, Credibility, Persecution, Police Conduct, Tenant Registration
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative (ifa) Standard of Review Credibility Persecution Police Conduct +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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person Who Is the Subject of the Appeal

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Appeal Division Decision (appeal From Refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable and safe internal flight alternative exists in Mumbai for the appellant
  2. 2 Whether the appellant would be identifiable or tracked down by Indian police if he relocated to Mumbai
  3. 3 Whether relocation to Mumbai would be unreasonable given the appellant's personal circumstances

Ratio Decidendi

On correctness review the RAD concluded the RPD did not err: the appellant failed to prove on the balance of probabilities that he would be persecuted or located by police in Mumbai and failed to show relocation there would be unreasonable; therefore a viable and safe IFA in Mumbai exists and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • The Refugee Protection Division decision of July 18, 2016 is confirmed; the appellant is not a Convention refugee under s.96 of the IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97; the appeal is dismissed.