TB9-33961

TB9-33961

The RAD allowed the appeal in part because the RPD erred in its credibility assessment of the mother by failing to apply the Gender Guidelines, failing to put adverse issues to her and failing to assess supporting evidence independently; on reassessment the mother's account that she faces a violent unresolved family dispute (honour‑related threats) and a risk of forced marriage was found credible, documentary country evidence demonstrates that state protection and internal relocation in Albania would likely be inadequate, and therefore she meets the statutory test as a person in need of protection under IRPA s.97(1)(b). The children's appeals were dismissed because they are US citizens...

Citation
TB9-33961
Parties
Appellant (mother): XXXX XXXX; Appellant (child): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (child): XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Appellants: Jeffrey L Goldman; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX; Respondent Counsel: Counsel for the Minister; Panel/chairperson: Julie Corry
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal — Reasons and Substitution of Determination
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; RPD decision set aside and substituted: mother found to be a person in need of protection; appeals of the two child appellants dismissed.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Forced Marriage, Blood Feud, Natural Justice, Application of Chairperson Guidelines 4
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Gender Based Persecution Credibility Assessment State Protection Internal Flight Alternative +4 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (mother)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (child)

XXXX XXXX

Appellant (child)

Jeffrey L Goldman

Counsel for the Appellants

XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Counsel for the Minister

Respondent Counsel

Julie Corry

Panel/chairperson

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal — Reasons and Substitution of Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Credibility of the principal claimant (mother)
  3. 3 Adequacy of state protection in Albania

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD allowed the appeal in part because the RPD erred in its credibility assessment of the mother by failing to apply the Gender Guidelines, failing to put adverse issues to her and failing to assess supporting evidence independently; on reassessment the mother's account that she faces a violent unresolved family dispute (honour‑related threats) and a risk of forced marriage was found credible, documentary country evidence demonstrates that state protection and internal relocation in Albania would likely be inadequate, and therefore she meets the statutory test as a person in need of protection under IRPA s.97(1)(b). The children's appeals were dismissed because they are US citizens...

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; RPD decision set aside and substituted: mother found to be a person in need of protection; appeals of the two child appellants dismissed.

Orders

  • Set aside Refugee Protection Division decision dated below and substitute RAD determination that XXXX XXXX is a person in need of protection under IRPA s.97(1)(b).
  • Confirm RPD decision that XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection (appeals dismissed).