TB8-08530

TB8-08530

The claimant failed to rebut the existence of a viable internal flight alternative in Baghdad on a balance of probabilities because she has family there who can provide protection and accommodation, objective evidence indicates reduced risk for a non‑practicing Christian and the persecutor lacks demonstrated ability to find her there; therefore she would not face a serious possibility of persecution and the claim is rejected.

Citation
TB8-08530
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Persecution (religion and Gender), Risk of Torture, Convention Refugee Determination, Standard of Proof (balance of Probabilities)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Gender Based Violence Internal Flight Alternative Persecution (religion and Gender) Risk of Torture Convention Refugee Determination +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 5 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is an internal flight alternative (IFA) available to the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the claimant faces a serious possibility of persecution on account of religion (Christian)
  3. 3 Whether the claimant faces a serious possibility of persecution on account of gender as a woman

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to rebut the existence of a viable internal flight alternative in Baghdad on a balance of probabilities because she has family there who can provide protection and accommodation, objective evidence indicates reduced risk for a non‑practicing Christian and the persecutor lacks demonstrated ability to find her there; therefore she would not face a serious possibility of persecution and the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected