John Loncar

The applicant, an ethnic Tibetan born in India, sought judicial review of a Refugee Protection Division (RPD) decision rejecting his claim for protection against China.

The RPD found that the applicant is an Indian citizen and failed to demonstrate significant impediments to exercising his citizenship rights or that he made reasonable efforts to overcome any such impediments.

The Federal Court held the RPD's decision was reasonable, noting the applicant had not attempted to renew his expired Identity Certificate or obtain alternative documents to acquire an Indian passport.

The applicants, a mother and three minor children from Nigeria, sought judicial review of a RAD decision dismissing their appeal and confirming they were not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Their claim was based on a fear of persecution from the husband's family to initiate the minor daughter into a pagan religious cult involving FGM.

The RAD determined they had a viable internal flight alternative (IFA).

The Court found the RAD reasonably assessed the IFA under the two-pronged Rasaratnam test, appropriately addressed the RPD's procedural issues, and held that the revocation of the Nigeria Jurisprudential Guide did not render the RAD's decision unreasonable.