MB6-01432

MB6-01432

The RAD confirmed the RPD's finding that an Internal Flight Alternative exists in Uttar Pradesh and, applying the correctness standard, concluded on the balance of probabilities that (1) inter‑state police communication in India is minimal and the tenant verification process would not likely lead to Punjabi police locating the Appellants in Uttar Pradesh and (2) relocation to Uttar Pradesh would not be objectively unreasonable or unduly harsh; accordingly the Appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the appeal must be dismissed.

Citation
MB6-01432
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant: Mrs. XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 May 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal by Refugee Appeal Division (rad)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Assessment, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4)), Oral Hearing (s.110(6)), Standard of Review, Torture and PTSD
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Assessment Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4)) Oral Hearing (s.110(6)) +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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Mrs. XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Appellants can avail themselves of an Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) in Uttar Pradesh
  2. 2 Whether new evidence submitted on appeal meets admissibility requirements of s.110(4) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether an oral hearing before the RAD is required under s.110(6) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD's finding that an Internal Flight Alternative exists in Uttar Pradesh and, applying the correctness standard, concluded on the balance of probabilities that (1) inter‑state police communication in India is minimal and the tenant verification process would not likely lead to Punjabi police locating the Appellants in Uttar Pradesh and (2) relocation to Uttar Pradesh would not be objectively unreasonable or unduly harsh; accordingly the Appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the appeal must be dismissed.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Confirm decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated February 16, 2016
  • Dismiss the appeal pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA