MB9-09551

MB9-09551

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found, on the available evidence, that the RPD reasonably concluded viable IFAs existed in Benin City or Port Harcourt and that the Appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution, torture, risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment there; the RPD did not improperly rely on the Jurisprudential Guide nor fail to consider Guideline 4 on the facts, and the minor born in the United States did not meet ss.96/97 IRPA risks.

Citation
MB9-09551
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (eldest): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (second): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Immigration)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Division Appeal (rad) / Decision / Reasons for Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Status, Risk of Persecution, Jurisprudential Guide, Gender Based Persecution, New Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Status Risk of Persecution Jurisprudential Guide Gender Based Persecution +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (eldest)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (second)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister (Immigration)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Division Appeal (rad) / Decision / Reasons for Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) existed in Benin City or Port Harcourt
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in fact-finding and credibility assessments
  3. 3 Whether the use of the Jurisprudential Guide unlawfully increased burden on claimants or fettered discretion

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the RAD found, on the available evidence, that the RPD reasonably concluded viable IFAs existed in Benin City or Port Harcourt and that the Appellants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution, torture, risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment there; the RPD did not improperly rely on the Jurisprudential Guide nor fail to consider Guideline 4 on the facts, and the minor born in the United States did not meet ss.96/97 IRPA risks.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed