VB8-02087

VB8-02087

The RPD did not err: appellants failed to rebut the presumption that Portugal can provide adequate state protection; objective country evidence and the appellants' failure to exhaust or follow up domestic remedies establish that protection is available, therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture or threat to life on return and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
VB8-02087
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellants: Minor Associate Appellants; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under section 111(1)(a) IRPA.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Gender Based Persecution, Domestic Violence, Exhaustion of Local Remedies
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law State Protection Gender Based Persecution Domestic Violence Exhaustion of Local Remedies

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

Minor Associate Appellants

Associate Appellants

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding state protection available in Portugal
  2. 2 Whether the appellants rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection
  3. 3 Whether Gender Guideline excuses exhaustion or follow-up of domestic remedies

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD did not err: appellants failed to rebut the presumption that Portugal can provide adequate state protection; objective country evidence and the appellants' failure to exhaust or follow up domestic remedies establish that protection is available, therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture or threat to life on return and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under section 111(1)(a) IRPA.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated March 29, 2018 confirmed.