TB9-31917

TB9-31917

The RPD's IFA finding was overturned because credible new and existing evidence established on a balance of probabilities that the ex-husband both had the motivation and the means (through family links, travel, and potential disclosure via Local Council documentation and corrupt authorities) to find and persecute the appellants in Mbarara, and Ugandan state protection would not be effective at the operational level; therefore the IFA fails and the appellants meet s.96 Convention refugee criteria.

Citation
TB9-31917
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision on Appeal (substitution of RPD Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, New Evidence Admissibility, Convention Refugee Status
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law International Protection Gender Based Violence Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Credibility Assessment New Evidence Admissibility +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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision on Appeal (substitution of RPD Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) exists in Mbarara
  2. 2 Whether the appellants would receive effective state protection in Uganda
  3. 3 Whether the Principal Appellant's testimony is credible

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD's IFA finding was overturned because credible new and existing evidence established on a balance of probabilities that the ex-husband both had the motivation and the means (through family links, travel, and potential disclosure via Local Council documentation and corrupt authorities) to find and persecute the appellants in Mbarara, and Ugandan state protection would not be effective at the operational level; therefore the IFA fails and the appellants meet s.96 Convention refugee criteria.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Substitute decision: Appellants are Convention refugees pursuant to section 111(1)(b) of the IRPA