MB9-11063

MB9-11063

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellants failed to demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, an individualized risk of persecution under section 96 or paragraph 97(1)(b) of the IRPA because criminality in Haiti is generalized and the principal appellant did not show a serious possibility of gender-based persecution; the associate appellant did not demonstrate risk in the United States; appeal dismissed under para 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
MB9-11063
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 February 2020
Procedural Posture
RAD Appeal of RPD Refugee Protection Decision Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued; Appeal Dismissed)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Risk Assessment Under S.97(1)(b), Gender Based Persecution, Particular Social Group, Country Conditions (haiti), Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Risk Assessment Under S.97(1)(b) Gender Based Persecution Particular Social Group Country Conditions (haiti) +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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (minor)

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

RAD Appeal of RPD Refugee Protection Decision Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued; Appeal Dismissed)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the principal appellant's risk as a single woman in Haiti under paragraph 97(1)(b) of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in concluding the principal appellant would be persecuted as a woman under section 96 of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred in concluding the associate appellant faces a risk in the United States under section 96 or paragraph 97(1)(b)

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the appellants failed to demonstrate, on a balance of probabilities, an individualized risk of persecution under section 96 or paragraph 97(1)(b) of the IRPA because criminality in Haiti is generalized and the principal appellant did not show a serious possibility of gender-based persecution; the associate appellant did not demonstrate risk in the United States; appeal dismissed under para 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed

Orders

  • Pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA, the RAD confirms the RPD determination that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection