Rym Jawad

The applicants sought judicial review of a RAD decision confirming the rejection of their refugee protection claims based on fear of persecution for political opinion.

The applicants argued the RPD member's comments created a reasonable apprehension of bias and the RAD's credibility assessment was unreasonable.

The Federal Court found no breach of procedural fairness and held the RAD's credibility findings were reasonable.

The applicants sought judicial review of a Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) decision confirming the Refugee Protection Division's finding that they were not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

The applicants' claim was based on fear of reprisals in Haiti stemming from a 1993 incident involving the principal applicant's father.

The RAD found that the applicants had a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) in Port-au-Prince, noting that the principal applicant's relatives resided there without issue.

The Federal Court held that the RAD's assessment of the IFA, including its consideration of generalized risk and gender-related persecution, was reasonable, and dismissed the application for judicial review.