TC0-03526

TC0-03526

The RAD found the RPD credibility findings not entitled to deference, accepted the core elements of the appellants' account that they face familial pressure to force FGM and that principal's family have capacity to locate them in Abuja, found state protection inadequate, and determined that relocation to Abuja would be unreasonable because cumulative employment and housing barriers plus separation or responsibility for a Canadian child with medical needs constitute undue hardship; accordingly no viable IFA exists and the appeal is allowed with substitution that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
TC0-03526
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (substitution)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that Appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Credibility Findings, State Protection, Relocation Reasonableness, Admission of Late Evidence, Separation of Child/undue Hardship
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Credibility Findings 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 5 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (substitution)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) exists (Abuja)
  2. 2 Whether RPD credibility findings are owed deference
  3. 3 Whether state protection in Abuja is available

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the RPD credibility findings not entitled to deference, accepted the core elements of the appellants' account that they face familial pressure to force FGM and that principal's family have capacity to locate them in Abuja, found state protection inadequate, and determined that relocation to Abuja would be unreasonable because cumulative employment and housing barriers plus separation or responsibility for a Canadian child with medical needs constitute undue hardship; accordingly no viable IFA exists and the appeal is allowed with substitution that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that Appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Substitute decision: Appellants declared Convention refugees