MC0-06114

MC0-06114

Appeal dismissed because on independent review the RPD correctly found appellants failed to discharge the burden to show no viable internal flight alternative: evidence did not establish the Cult had the means or motivation to locate and harm them throughout Nigeria (first prong) and relocation to Abuja, Port Harcourt, Benin City or Enugu would not be objectively unreasonable or unduly harsh in their circumstances (second prong); most new evidence was inadmissible under s.110(4); revocation of the JG did not vitiate the RPD's lawful application of the analytical framework; minors' U.S.‑based protection claims were not established.

Citation
MC0-06114
Parties
Appellant Principal: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Associate (spouse): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellants Minors: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Under IRPA / RAD Merits Determination on Appeal From RPD Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative (ifa), Admissibility of New Evidence, Credibility Findings, Jurisprudential Guide Revocation, Mental Health and Access to Care, COVID 19 Pandemic and Country Entry Protocols
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Internal Flight Alternative (ifa) Admissibility of New Evidence Credibility Findings Jurisprudential Guide Revocation +2 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Principal

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Associate (spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellants Minors

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division Under IRPA / RAD Merits Determination on Appeal From RPD Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants have a viable internal flight alternative in Abuja, Port Harcourt, Benin City or Enugu
  2. 2 Whether appellants established Convention refugee or s.97(1) protection claims
  3. 3 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA and RAD Rules

Ratio Decidendi

Appeal dismissed because on independent review the RPD correctly found appellants failed to discharge the burden to show no viable internal flight alternative: evidence did not establish the Cult had the means or motivation to locate and harm them throughout Nigeria (first prong) and relocation to Abuja, Port Harcourt, Benin City or Enugu would not be objectively unreasonable or unduly harsh in their circumstances (second prong); most new evidence was inadmissible under s.110(4); revocation of the JG did not vitiate the RPD's lawful application of the analytical framework; minors' U.S.‑based protection claims were not established.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated February 20, 2020 is confirmed
  • Most post‑decision evidence was not admitted; only the COVID‑19 Agreement & Declaration Form admitted as new evidence and RAD submissions on COVID‑19 were considered