TC0-02261

TC0-02261

The RAD allowed the appeal for the principal appellant and her two older children and substituted a finding that they are Convention refugees because the proposed IFAs in Nigeria were not reasonable: relocation would impose undue hardship given the stigma associated with being the family of an "XXXX" child, the youngest child's special needs and citizenship situation, lack of support and the appellant's psychological limitations, making relocation unrealistic and unsafe; the youngest appellant was dismissed because, as a U.S. citizen, there was no serious possibility of persecution or risk to life on the balance of probabilities.

Citation
TC0-02261
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; principal appellant and two older children found to be Convention refugees; youngest appellant dismissed.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee, Female Genital Mutilation, Credibility, Undue Hardship, Best Interests of the Child
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Female Genital Mutilation Credibility Undue Hardship +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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proposed internal flight alternatives (IFAs) within Nigeria are reasonable for the appellants
  2. 2 Whether the appellants meet the definition of a Convention refugee
  3. 3 Whether the youngest appellant faces a risk given U.S. citizenship

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD allowed the appeal for the principal appellant and her two older children and substituted a finding that they are Convention refugees because the proposed IFAs in Nigeria were not reasonable: relocation would impose undue hardship given the stigma associated with being the family of an "XXXX" child, the youngest child's special needs and citizenship situation, lack of support and the appellant's psychological limitations, making relocation unrealistic and unsafe; the youngest appellant was dismissed because, as a U.S. citizen, there was no serious possibility of persecution or risk to life on the balance of probabilities.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; principal appellant and two older children found to be Convention refugees; youngest appellant dismissed.

Orders

  • Set aside the RPD determination and substitute that the principal appellant and the two older children are Convention refugees pursuant to section 111(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
  • Confirm the RPD determination that the youngest appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.