VC0-01336

VC0-01336

The RPD erred in finding a viable internal flight alternative; the Appellants rebutted the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence and demonstrated on the balance of probabilities that Los Zetas remained motivated and capable of locating and killing them across multiple locations in Mexico, so they are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA and the appeal is allowed with a substituted decision accordingly.

Citation
VC0-01336
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Child: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Child: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Substitute Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Persons in Need of Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Extortion, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Criminal Law (organized Crime) Persons in Need of Protection Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Extortion +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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Child

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Substitute Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether state protection in Mexico was available or effective
  3. 3 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (Merida) existed for the Appellants

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD erred in finding a viable internal flight alternative; the Appellants rebutted the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence and demonstrated on the balance of probabilities that Los Zetas remained motivated and capable of locating and killing them across multiple locations in Mexico, so they are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA and the appeal is allowed with a substituted decision accordingly.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed; substitute decision that the Appellants are persons in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA.