MB9-27549

MB9-27549

The RAD allowed the appeal because the RPD erred by (1) identifying the entire state of Yucatan as a viable IFA without sufficient specificity and (2) imputing omissions from the appellant's mother's narrative to the appellant; on the balance of probabilities the appellant would face a risk to his life or cruel and unusual treatment from Los Zetas throughout Mexico and adequate state protection is not available, therefore the RAD substituted the RPD decision and found the appellant to be a person in need of protection.

Citation
MB9-27549
Parties
Appellant / Person in Need of Protection (subject of Appeal): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) Under IRPA / RAD Decision (appeal Heard and Decided)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD substitutes decision that Appellant is a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Organized Crime (los Zetas), Imputed Omissions
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Protection Administrative Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Assessment State Protection Organized Crime (los Zetas) +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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Need of Protection (subject of Appeal)

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) Under IRPA / RAD Decision (appeal Heard and Decided)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Existence of a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) and required specificity of location
  2. 2 Whether credibility findings were reasonable and whether omissions in mother's narrative could be imputed to appellant
  3. 3 Whether appellant faces a risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment from organized criminal groups throughout Mexico

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD allowed the appeal because the RPD erred by (1) identifying the entire state of Yucatan as a viable IFA without sufficient specificity and (2) imputing omissions from the appellant's mother's narrative to the appellant; on the balance of probabilities the appellant would face a risk to his life or cruel and unusual treatment from Los Zetas throughout Mexico and adequate state protection is not available, therefore the RAD substituted the RPD decision and found the appellant to be a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD substitutes decision that Appellant is a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Decision substituted: Appellant is declared a person in need of protection.