TC0-09881

TC0-09881

The RAD found the RPD erred by mischaracterizing and discounting evidence of the Principal Appellant's bisexuality and by failing to follow SOGIE/Gender Guidelines, admitted new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA which corroborated consultations with U.S. counsel and divorce/custody status, concluded the Appellants have a well-founded fear of persecution with no adequate state protection or reasonable internal flight alternative, and substituted its own decision under para.111(1)(b) IRPA that the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
TC0-09881
Parties
Appellant Principal: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Minor: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent Minister: Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division; Appeal Allowed and Substituted Decision Issued
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that Appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Sexual Orientation, Particular Social Group, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Admissibility of New Evidence, Procedural Fairness, Gender Based Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Sexual Orientation Particular Social Group Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Admissibility of New Evidence +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Principal

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Minor

Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship

Respondent Minister

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division; Appeal Allowed and Substituted Decision Issued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in its credibility findings and mischaracterized the Principal Appellant's bisexuality
  2. 2 Whether the Appellants have a well-founded fear of persecution on return to Nigeria
  3. 3 Whether state protection is reasonably available in Nigeria

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the RPD erred by mischaracterizing and discounting evidence of the Principal Appellant's bisexuality and by failing to follow SOGIE/Gender Guidelines, admitted new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA which corroborated consultations with U.S. counsel and divorce/custody status, concluded the Appellants have a well-founded fear of persecution with no adequate state protection or reasonable internal flight alternative, and substituted its own decision under para.111(1)(b) IRPA that the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that Appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

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