TB9-09169

TB9-09169

The RPD breached procedural fairness by failing to notify appellants that state protection and an internal flight alternative were determinative issues; on independent assessment the appellants were found credible, have a well‑founded fear of persecution on account of imputed political opinion, and there is no adequate state protection or viable IFA in Yemen, therefore the appeals are allowed and a substituted decision that the appellants are Convention refugees is warranted.

Citation
TB9-09169
Parties
Principal Appellant (pa): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX SHIHON; Associate Appellant (aa): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Forced Recruitment, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Procedural Fairness, Convention Refugee Definition, Civil War Claims, Imputed Political Opinion, Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Forced Recruitment Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Credibility Assessment +5 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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX SHIHON

Principal Appellant (pa)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant (aa)

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD breached procedural fairness by failing to notify that state protection/IFA were determinative issues
  2. 2 Whether the Appellants' testimony was credible
  3. 3 Whether there is an objective basis for a well-founded fear of persecution on account of imputed political opinion

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD breached procedural fairness by failing to notify appellants that state protection and an internal flight alternative were determinative issues; on independent assessment the appellants were found credible, have a well‑founded fear of persecution on account of imputed political opinion, and there is no adequate state protection or viable IFA in Yemen, therefore the appeals are allowed and a substituted decision that the appellants are Convention refugees is warranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Orders

  • Appeals allowed and the decision of the Refugee Protection Division is set aside; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees.