MC2-00122

MC2-00122

The appellants failed to discharge the burden to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that they would face a serious possibility of persecution or a section 97 risk in Delhi or that relocation to Delhi would be objectively unreasonable; the RPD's finding that Delhi is a viable internal flight alternative is upheld and therefore the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
MC2-00122
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 September 2022
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division Decision on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Assessment, Natural Justice, Vulnerable Person Designation, Trauma‑informed Adjudication, State Database Tracking (cctns/aadhaar)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Assessment Natural Justice Vulnerable Person Designation Trauma‑informed Adjudication +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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division Decision on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding Delhi a viable internal flight alternative (IFA)
  2. 2 Whether the RPD breached natural justice by not applying Gender Guideline 4 or Vulnerable Persons Guideline 8 and by not designating appellants vulnerable
  3. 3 Whether appellants met burden to prove serious possibility of persecution or risk in Delhi

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants failed to discharge the burden to prove, on a balance of probabilities, that they would face a serious possibility of persecution or a section 97 risk in Delhi or that relocation to Delhi would be objectively unreasonable; the RPD's finding that Delhi is a viable internal flight alternative is upheld and therefore the appellants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed.
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.