TB8-32423

TB8-32423

The RAD confirms the RPD: the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection because Port Harcourt and Abuja constitute viable internal flight alternatives that are safe and reasonable for the appellants; the therapy letter was admitted as new evidence but does not undermine the IFA finding; WhatsApp messages and photographs were excluded for credibility/insufficient explanation; the appeal is dismissed under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
TB8-32423
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellants: XXXX XXXX and four minor appellants; Respondent: Minister (respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Rule 29 New Evidence, Credibility Findings, Gender Guidelines, S.110(4) IRPA, S.111(1)(a) IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Gender Based Violence Internal Flight Alternative Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Rule 29 New Evidence +4 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 6 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX and four minor appellants

Associate Appellants

Minister (respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether there is a viable internal flight alternative (Port Harcourt or Abuja)
  3. 3 Whether the Rule 29 documents meet admissibility and s.110(4) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirms the RPD: the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection because Port Harcourt and Abuja constitute viable internal flight alternatives that are safe and reasonable for the appellants; the therapy letter was admitted as new evidence but does not undermine the IFA finding; WhatsApp messages and photographs were excluded for credibility/insufficient explanation; the appeal is dismissed under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA
  • Letter from therapist admitted as new evidence; WhatsApp messages and photographs rejected on credibility grounds