MC0-09806

MC0-09806

The RAD concluded the RPD did not err: on the balance of probabilities the appellants have an IFA in Kinshasa and relocation there would not be objectively unreasonable given documentary evidence, lack of nexus showing anyone is seeking the appellant, family in Kinshasa, and employment prospects; accordingly the appellants did not demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in the DRC on a Convention ground and the RPD decision is confirmed.

Citation
MC0-09806
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Minor: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Minor: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Final Decision (reasons) by Rad, March 8, 2021
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Status, Gender Related Persecution, Well Founded Fear
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Status Gender Related Persecution Well Founded Fear

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Minor

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Minor

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Final Decision (reasons) by Rad, March 8, 2021

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants have an internal flight alternative (IFA) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Kinshasa)
  2. 2 Whether the appellant established a well-founded fear of persecution in the DRC by reason of membership in the particular social group 'women' or by virtue of her occupation
  3. 3 Whether the Refugee Protection Division erred in law or fact in its IFA and reasonableness assessment

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD concluded the RPD did not err: on the balance of probabilities the appellants have an IFA in Kinshasa and relocation there would not be objectively unreasonable given documentary evidence, lack of nexus showing anyone is seeking the appellant, family in Kinshasa, and employment prospects; accordingly the appellants did not demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution in the DRC on a Convention ground and the RPD decision is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • RPD determination confirmed that the appellants are not Convention refugees under section 96 of the IRPA and not persons in need of protection under section 97 of the IRPA