TC0-10133

TC0-10133

The RPD erred by placing undue weight on minor discrepancies and applying an overly microscopic credibility analysis and by finding Lagos a viable IFA; credible evidence established repeated targeting and a serious possibility that the female Minor Appellants would be subjected to forced FGM and that state protection would not be forthcoming, therefore the Principal Appellant and female Minor Appellants are Convention refugees; the male Minor Appellant's claim lacks any evidentiary basis and is rejected.

Citation
TC0-10133
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Female Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Female Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Male Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons for Decision)
Outcome
Appeals of the Principal Appellant and the female Minor Appellants allowed; appeal of the male Minor Appellant rejected; RPD determination set aside as to Principal and female minors and substituted finding that they are Convention refugees; RPD determination as to male minor confirmed.
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Findings, Convention Refugee Determination, State Protection, Indigeneity
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Gender Based Violence Child Protection Female Genital Mutilation Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Findings Convention Refugee Determination +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Female Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Female Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Male Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision (reasons for Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Protection Division erred in credibility findings regarding the Principal Appellant
  2. 2 Whether Lagos constituted a reasonable Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) for the Principal Appellant and female Minor Appellants
  3. 3 Whether the Principal Appellant and female Minor Appellants face a risk of persecution (including forced FGM) and whether state protection is available

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD erred by placing undue weight on minor discrepancies and applying an overly microscopic credibility analysis and by finding Lagos a viable IFA; credible evidence established repeated targeting and a serious possibility that the female Minor Appellants would be subjected to forced FGM and that state protection would not be forthcoming, therefore the Principal Appellant and female Minor Appellants are Convention refugees; the male Minor Appellant's claim lacks any evidentiary basis and is rejected.

Court Disposition

Appeals of the Principal Appellant and the female Minor Appellants allowed; appeal of the male Minor Appellant rejected; RPD determination set aside as to Principal and female minors and substituted finding that they are Convention refugees; RPD determination as to male minor confirmed.

Orders

  • Pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(b) IRPA, the Refugee Appeal Division sets aside the RPD determination and substitutes its own determination that the Principal Appellant and the female Minor Appellants are Convention refugees.
  • Pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) IRPA, the Refugee Appeal Division confirms the RPD's determination that the male Minor Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.