The applicant, a minor from Angola, sought judicial review of a RAD decision confirming he was not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection because he had a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) in Angola.
The applicant alleged the RAD's IFA finding was unreasonable, claiming his parents could not relocate due to his mother's hypertension and his father's inability to support the extended family.
He also alleged a breach of natural justice due to the incompetence of his former RPD counsel and a failure to follow the Chairperson's Guideline on child refugee claimants.
The Federal Court dismissed the application.
Applying the Vavilov standard, the Court found the RAD reasonably concluded the new evidence did not demonstrate that relocation would cause undue hardship.
The medical report did not show a need for emergency care unavailable in the IFAs, and the father's statement about reduced legal work outside Luanda did not meet the high threshold for unreasonableness.
Because the IFA determination was reasonable, the issues of counsel incompetence and the Guideline's application were rendered moot.
