TB5-04487

TB5-04487

The RAD dismissed the appeal because the seven items of evidence were not new and failed s.110(4) admissibility; on independent assessment the RAD found a viable internal flight alternative in Maracaibo (large, accessible city with employment and services) and insufficient evidence that the union would pursue or have capacity to harm the Appellants there; therefore the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the RPD decision is confirmed.

Citation
TB5-04487
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Appeal Heard; Decision on Admissibility of New Evidence and Internal Flight Alternative; Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4)), Standard of Review / Role of RAD, Convention Refugee / Person in Need of Protection, Section 96 and 97 IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Admissibility of New Evidence (s.110(4)) Standard of Review / Role of RAD Convention Refugee / Person in Need of Protection Section 96 and 97 IRPA

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Appeal Heard; Decision on Admissibility of New Evidence and Internal Flight Alternative; Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether evidence submitted on appeal is admissible under s.110(4) IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in its internal flight alternative (IFA) analysis under s.97 and s.96 IRPA
  3. 3 What standard of review and scope of assessment the RAD must apply in reviewing an RPD decision

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal because the seven items of evidence were not new and failed s.110(4) admissibility; on independent assessment the RAD found a viable internal flight alternative in Maracaibo (large, accessible city with employment and services) and insufficient evidence that the union would pursue or have capacity to harm the Appellants there; therefore the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the RPD decision is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Pursuant to s.111(1)(a) IRPA the decision of the Refugee Protection Division is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.