MC0-09170

MC0-09170

On independent review the RAD concluded appellants did not establish on a balance of probabilities that they would face persecution, torture, a risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment in Hyderabad, nor that relocation there would be unreasonable; therefore the RPD's IFA finding was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
MC0-09170
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (mother): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (wife): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant (daughter): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision of Refugee Appeal Division Confirming RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirming appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection is upheld
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Persecution, State Protection, Convention Refugee Status
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Persecution State Protection Convention Refugee Status

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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (mother)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (wife)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant (daughter)

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision of Refugee Appeal Division Confirming RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its assessment of the internal flight alternative (IFA)
  2. 2 Whether appellants face a serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture/cruel treatment in Hyderabad
  3. 3 Whether the RPD adequately considered documentary and testimonial evidence regarding risk to Muslims and police coordination

Ratio Decidendi

On independent review the RAD concluded appellants did not establish on a balance of probabilities that they would face persecution, torture, a risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment in Hyderabad, nor that relocation there would be unreasonable; therefore the RPD's IFA finding was correct and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirming appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection is upheld

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act