2020 RLLR 173

2020 RLLR 173

The panel accepted the claimants' credible testimony and corroborative evidence, found objective country documentation demonstrates systemic persecution of Muslim Brotherhood affiliates and opponents, concluded state protection is unavailable, found no viable internal flight alternative, and determined the delay and non-use of other visas were not substantial enough to undermine credibility; accordingly the claimants are Convention refugees.

Citation
2020 RLLR 173
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spouse: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Child: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Child: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Intervener: Minister of Immigration
Court
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour Relations
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Claimants found to be Convention refugees; refugee protection claim accepted for principal, spouse and children
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Political Opinion, Particular Social Group (family), State Protection, Delay and Credibility, Ministerial Intervention
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Political Opinion Particular Social Group (family) State Protection Delay and Credibility +1 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Child

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Child

Minister of Immigration

Intervener

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether delay in seeking asylum or use of other visas undermines credibility
  3. 3 Whether the State can provide protection

Ratio Decidendi

The panel accepted the claimants' credible testimony and corroborative evidence, found objective country documentation demonstrates systemic persecution of Muslim Brotherhood affiliates and opponents, concluded state protection is unavailable, found no viable internal flight alternative, and determined the delay and non-use of other visas were not substantial enough to undermine credibility; accordingly the claimants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Claimants found to be Convention refugees; refugee protection claim accepted for principal, spouse and children