TB6-15829

TB6-15829

The RAD found the RPD erred by undervaluing and dismissing testimonial and documentary evidence (testimony of the Principal Appellant, a statutory declaration, a sworn letter from husband, and a respected settlement organization's letter). On a fresh correctness review the RAD accepted the appellant's identity and clan membership, found Somalia unable to provide state protection and no viable internal flight alternative, and concluded on a balance of probabilities that the appellants face a serious possibility of persecution by al-Shabaab and are Convention refugees; accordingly the RAD set aside the RPD decision and substituted a finding of refugee status under IRPA.

Citation
TB6-15829
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division; Determination Substituted Under Section 111(1)(b)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside the RPD decision and substitutes its determination that the appellants are Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Identity Verification, Credibility, Standard of Review, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Persecution by Non State Actor (al Shabaab), Minor Claimant
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Identity Verification Credibility Standard of Review State Protection +3 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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under IRPA / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division; Determination Substituted Under Section 111(1)(b)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in finding the appellants had not established their identities
  2. 2 Whether the RAD should defer to RPD credibility findings or apply correctness standard
  3. 3 Whether documentary and testimonial evidence established citizenship and clan membership

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the RPD erred by undervaluing and dismissing testimonial and documentary evidence (testimony of the Principal Appellant, a statutory declaration, a sworn letter from husband, and a respected settlement organization's letter). On a fresh correctness review the RAD accepted the appellant's identity and clan membership, found Somalia unable to provide state protection and no viable internal flight alternative, and concluded on a balance of probabilities that the appellants face a serious possibility of persecution by al-Shabaab and are Convention refugees; accordingly the RAD set aside the RPD decision and substituted a finding of refugee status under IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside the RPD decision and substitutes its determination that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Orders

  • Pursuant to section 111(1)(b) of the IRPA the RAD sets aside the RPD decision and substitutes its determination that the appellants are Convention refugees.