MB9-30509

MB9-30509

The RAD found the RPD erred in credibility findings by making factual errors and misapprehensions, improperly discounting testimonial and corroborative documentary evidence, failing to assess the Minor Appellant's FGM allegation, and over-relying on a single general NDP source; the RAD admitted the new village elder affidavit under s.110(4) IRPA and Singh, found the appellants credible, concluded state protection was inadequate and no viable IFA existed, and accordingly set aside the RPD decision and substituted a decision that the appellants are Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA.

Citation
MB9-30509
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent (minister): Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal: Appeal Allowed and Substituted Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted decision that appellants are Convention refugees under section 96 of IRPA
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Admissibility of New Evidence, Procedural Fairness
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Credibility Assessment State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Admissibility of New Evidence +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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal: Appeal Allowed and Substituted Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in assessing the appellants' credibility regarding continued targeting by the associate appellant's family
  2. 2 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA and application of Singh factors
  3. 3 Whether the Minor Appellant faces a serious possibility of persecution by reason of being targeted for FGM (membership of a particular social group)

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the RPD erred in credibility findings by making factual errors and misapprehensions, improperly discounting testimonial and corroborative documentary evidence, failing to assess the Minor Appellant's FGM allegation, and over-relying on a single general NDP source; the RAD admitted the new village elder affidavit under s.110(4) IRPA and Singh, found the appellants credible, concluded state protection was inadequate and no viable IFA existed, and accordingly set aside the RPD decision and substituted a decision that the appellants are Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted decision that appellants are Convention refugees under section 96 of IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • RPD decision set aside