2020 RLLR 74

2020 RLLR 74

The tribunal accepted the claimants' credibility, found objective country evidence corroborated targeted violence by the Biplav Maoists and demonstrated police inability to protect; no viable internal flight alternative existed because the group operates nationwide; therefore the claimants met the definition of Convention refugees under ss.96 and 97(1) of the IRPA.

Citation
2020 RLLR 74
Parties
Principal Claimant: [XXX]; Associate Claimant: [XXX]; Adult Claimant: [XXX]; Minor Claimant: [XXX]
Court
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour Relations
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Protection Division Decision
Outcome
Claimants found to be Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Political Opinion, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Persecution, Membership of a Political Party, Extortion, Kidnapping
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Convention Refugee Political Opinion State Protection Internal Flight Alternative +5 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

[XXX]

Principal Claimant

[XXX]

Associate Claimant

[XXX]

Adult Claimant

[XXX]

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Refugee Protection Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants qualify as Convention refugees under ss.96 and 97(1) of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the principal claimant was an active member of the Nepali Congress and targeted for his political opinion
  3. 3 Whether the Biplav Maoists persecuted or threatened the claimants on account of actual or imputed political opinion

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal accepted the claimants' credibility, found objective country evidence corroborated targeted violence by the Biplav Maoists and demonstrated police inability to protect; no viable internal flight alternative existed because the group operates nationwide; therefore the claimants met the definition of Convention refugees under ss.96 and 97(1) of the IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claimants found to be Convention refugees

Orders

  • Claimants determined to be Convention refugees pursuant to section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act