VB9-02951

VB9-02951

On independent assessment the RAD found that the appellants (Principal Appellant and two sons) met the high evidentiary burden to rebut the presumption of state protection in Israel given repeated failures of Israeli authorities to provide adequate operational protection; therefore their negative RPD determinations were set aside and they are Convention refugees; however one son (XXXX) who is a citizen of another state was found not to face risk there and his negative determination is confirmed.

Citation
VB9-02951
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Spouse: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Son: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Son: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent Minister: Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part: RAD sets aside RPD negative determinations for the Principal Appellant and two appellants and finds them to be Convention refugees; RAD confirms RPD negative determination for one appellant who remains a citizen of another country and is not at risk.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Gender Based Violence, Convention Refugee Determination, Article 1 F Exclusion, Internal Flight Alternative
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Family Law State Protection Gender Based Violence Convention Refugee Determination Article 1 F Exclusion +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 6 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Spouse

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Son

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Son

Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness

Respondent Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Refugee Appeal Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adequate state protection is available in Israel
  2. 2 Whether the presumption of state protection was rebutted
  3. 3 Whether Article 1F(b) exclusion applied for child abduction

Ratio Decidendi

On independent assessment the RAD found that the appellants (Principal Appellant and two sons) met the high evidentiary burden to rebut the presumption of state protection in Israel given repeated failures of Israeli authorities to provide adequate operational protection; therefore their negative RPD determinations were set aside and they are Convention refugees; however one son (XXXX) who is a citizen of another state was found not to face risk there and his negative determination is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part: RAD sets aside RPD negative determinations for the Principal Appellant and two appellants and finds them to be Convention refugees; RAD confirms RPD negative determination for one appellant who remains a citizen of another country and is not at risk.

Orders

  • Set aside the Refugee Protection Division negative determinations for the Principal Appellant and two appellants and substitute positive determinations finding them to be Convention refugees pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(b) of the IRPA
  • Confirm the Refugee Protection Division negative determination with respect to the appellant who is a citizen of another country and dismiss his appeal pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the IRPA