TB9-30946

TB9-30946

The RPD erred in finding Maracaibo a reasonable IFA: objective and concrete evidence of the collapse of medical services in Venezuela combined with the appellants' advanced age and serious chronic medical conditions made relocation to Maracaibo unduly harsh and objectively unreasonable; accordingly the appellants face a personalized risk to life under s.97(1), state protection is unavailable, and the appeal is allowed with substitution that the appellants are persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB9-30946
Parties
Appellant: Principal Appellant; Appellant: Associate Appellant
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Final Decision on Appeal (substitution)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; decision of the RPD set aside and substituted
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Medical Evidence and Access to Healthcare, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Credibility, Targeted Extortion and Political Militias (colectivos)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Humanitarian Protection Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Medical Evidence and Access to Healthcare Nexus to Convention Grounds +2 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 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant

Appellant

Associate Appellant

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Final Decision on Appeal (substitution)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Maracaibo is a viable internal flight alternative (safety and reasonableness prongs)
  2. 2 Whether the appellants face a personalized risk to life under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether operationally adequate state protection is available in Venezuela

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD erred in finding Maracaibo a reasonable IFA: objective and concrete evidence of the collapse of medical services in Venezuela combined with the appellants' advanced age and serious chronic medical conditions made relocation to Maracaibo unduly harsh and objectively unreasonable; accordingly the appellants face a personalized risk to life under s.97(1), state protection is unavailable, and the appeal is allowed with substitution that the appellants are persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; decision of the RPD set aside and substituted

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division set aside and substituted: appellants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA