MC0-10383

MC0-10383

The appeals are dismissed because, although key events in 2011 and 2018 were found credible, the evidence does not establish on a balance of probabilities that Los Zetas or the named cousin were responsible for the 2018 threats and attempted kidnapping; identified inconsistencies (including a major inconsistency in the brother‑in‑law's statement) prevent establishment of the necessary nexus; the principal appellant is not excluded under Article 1F(b).

Citation
MC0-10383
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant (spouse): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant (child): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Credibility Assessment, Nexus to Persecutor, Article 1 F(b) Exclusion, Risk Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Criminal Law (exclusion) Refugee Protection Credibility Assessment Nexus to Persecutor Article 1 F(b) Exclusion Risk Assessment

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (spouse)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant (child)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are personally at risk from Los Zetas
  2. 2 Whether incidents alleged in 2018 are connected to 2011 refusal to allow drug sales (nexus)
  3. 3 Whether principal appellant is excluded under Article 1F(b) of the Refugee Convention

Ratio Decidendi

The appeals are dismissed because, although key events in 2011 and 2018 were found credible, the evidence does not establish on a balance of probabilities that Los Zetas or the named cousin were responsible for the 2018 threats and attempted kidnapping; identified inconsistencies (including a major inconsistency in the brother‑in‑law's statement) prevent establishment of the necessary nexus; the principal appellant is not excluded under Article 1F(b).

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals dismissed.
  • No exclusion under Article 1F(b) applied to the principal appellant.