TB9-07196

TB9-07196

The RAD admitted post‑RPD evidence as new, credible and relevant; on a balance of probabilities the Husband's post‑decision conduct transformed him into an agent of persecution, there is a real risk of serious violence including in relation to the Female Minor Appellant and FGM, no reasonable IFA exists given the Principal Appellant's status and vulnerabilities, and state protection is inadequate; therefore the RPD decision is set aside and the Appellants are Convention refugees as members of particular social groups (woman; children of the Husband).

Citation
TB9-07196
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Female Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Male Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Hearing and Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Appeals allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted with a finding that the Appellants are Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Agent of Persecution, Female Genital Mutilation, Domestic Violence, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Particular Social Group, Sur Place Claim
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Agent of Persecution Female Genital Mutilation Domestic Violence Internal Flight Alternative 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Female Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Male Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Hearing and Decision on Appeal (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Husband is an agent of persecution
  2. 2 Whether, if the Husband is an agent of persecution, the Appellants qualify as Convention refugees
  3. 3 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA and Rule 29

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD admitted post‑RPD evidence as new, credible and relevant; on a balance of probabilities the Husband's post‑decision conduct transformed him into an agent of persecution, there is a real risk of serious violence including in relation to the Female Minor Appellant and FGM, no reasonable IFA exists given the Principal Appellant's status and vulnerabilities, and state protection is inadequate; therefore the RPD decision is set aside and the Appellants are Convention refugees as members of particular social groups (woman; children of the Husband).

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted with a finding that the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Orders

  • Set aside the Refugee Protection Division determination
  • Substitute a finding that the Principal Appellant and the Minor Appellants are Convention refugees as members of particular social groups