MB4-05354

MB4-05354

On the evidence, tenant and employment verification practices, national ID and police communication systems in India are not sufficiently comprehensive or routinely used to enable Punjab police to locate the appellants in Delhi or Mumbai; appellants do not fit a profile that would trigger interstate policing; relocation would not amount to undue hardship; therefore a viable IFA exists and the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection, so the RPD decision is confirmed.

Citation
MB4-05354
Parties
Principal Appellant: Mr. XXXX XXXX; Appellant: Ms. XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision at Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming RPD Determination
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Status Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Country Conditions Evidence

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

Parties

Mr. XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

Ms. XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision at Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Confirming RPD Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Delhi or Mumbai constitute a viable Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) for the appellants
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in its assessment of documentary country evidence and credibility
  3. 3 Whether relocation would impose undue hardship making IFA unreasonable

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence, tenant and employment verification practices, national ID and police communication systems in India are not sufficiently comprehensive or routinely used to enable Punjab police to locate the appellants in Delhi or Mumbai; appellants do not fit a profile that would trigger interstate policing; relocation would not amount to undue hardship; therefore a viable IFA exists and the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection, so the RPD decision is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the Refugee Protection Division determination is confirmed pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA