MB8-04949

MB8-04949

The appeal is dismissed because the appellants failed to prove prospective risk: the RPD reasonably concluded there was no demonstrated link between the threats and the subsequent murder, the threats appeared tied to criminal theft rather than a targeted persecution of the female appellant, there was no evidence of harm to family members after her departure, internal relocation was a viable option, and available alternatives for the minor (US citizenship or parental custody arrangements) eliminated the requisite risk standard under paragraph 97(1)(b) IRPA.

Citation
MB8-04949
Parties
Appellant (principal): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (associate): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Final Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division; Record Only, No Oral Hearing Requested
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under subsection 111(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Persons in Need of Protection, Convention Refugee, Prospective Risk, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Internal Relocation
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Refugee Protection Persons in Need of Protection Convention Refugee Prospective Risk Nexus to Convention Grounds Internal Relocation

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (principal)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (associate)

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Final Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division; Record Only, No Oral Hearing Requested

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are persons in need of protection under paragraph 97(1)(b) IRPA due to prospective risk
  2. 2 Whether there is a nexus between the threats/attempted theft and the subsequent murder of the NGO driver
  3. 3 Whether internal flight or relocation within Haiti is a viable alternative for the female appellant

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the appellants failed to prove prospective risk: the RPD reasonably concluded there was no demonstrated link between the threats and the subsequent murder, the threats appeared tied to criminal theft rather than a targeted persecution of the female appellant, there was no evidence of harm to family members after her departure, internal relocation was a viable option, and available alternatives for the minor (US citizenship or parental custody arrangements) eliminated the requisite risk standard under paragraph 97(1)(b) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD determination confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under subsection 111(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.