2020 RLLR 50

2020 RLLR 50

Tribunal accepted the principal claimant's and most joint claimants' claims as Convention refugees because credible testimony and corroborative country documentation established a well-founded fear of persecution by Hamas in Gaza linked to political opinion and gender, lack of effective state protection, no viable internal flight alternative, and no right of return to former habitual residences; the claims of the two American-born minor claimants were rejected because the evidence did not establish a risk of persecution in the United States beyond concerns of family separation.

Citation
2020 RLLR 50
Parties
Principal Claimant: [XXX]; Spouse/joint Claimant: [XXX]; Joint Claimant Daughter: [XXX]; Joint Claimant Son (american Born Twin): [XXX]
Court
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour Relations
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (merits Determination)
Outcome
Principal claimant and most joint claimants accepted as Convention refugees pursuant to section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; two American-born minor claimants rejected.
Legal Topics
Asylum, Convention Refugee Determination, Statelessness, Gender Based Persecution, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Asylum Convention Refugee Determination Statelessness Gender Based Persecution +2 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

[XXX]

Principal Claimant

[XXX]

Spouse/joint Claimant

[XXX]

Joint Claimant Daughter

[XXX]

Joint Claimant Son (american Born Twin)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (merits Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants have a well-founded fear of persecution in a former habitual residence
  2. 2 Nexus to Convention grounds (political opinion; membership in a particular social group based on gender and family membership)
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection exists

Ratio Decidendi

Tribunal accepted the principal claimant's and most joint claimants' claims as Convention refugees because credible testimony and corroborative country documentation established a well-founded fear of persecution by Hamas in Gaza linked to political opinion and gender, lack of effective state protection, no viable internal flight alternative, and no right of return to former habitual residences; the claims of the two American-born minor claimants were rejected because the evidence did not establish a risk of persecution in the United States beyond concerns of family separation.

Court Disposition

Principal claimant and most joint claimants accepted as Convention refugees pursuant to section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; two American-born minor claimants rejected.

Orders

  • Recognize principal claimant [XXX] as a Convention refugee pursuant to s.96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
  • Recognize joint claimants [XXX] (spouse) and the three joint female minor claimants [XXX] as Convention refugees pursuant to s.96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.