TC0-07681

TC0-07681

The RAD admitted new country condition and family law evidence under s.110(4) IRPA, found the minor Appellants (part‑Tigrayan) face a serious possibility of persecution and lack state protection and internal flight alternative and are Convention refugees, and remitted the principal Appellant's claim because the RPD erred in excluding family‑membership and domestic violence evidence and failed to consider the totality of her claim but there was insufficient evidence to substitute a finding that she is a Convention refugee.

Citation
TC0-07681
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 March 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / RAD Decision on Appeal (allowed in Part; Remitted in Part)
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, New Evidence Admissibility, Procedural Fairness, State Protection, Persecution on Ethnic Grounds, Gender/domestic Violence, Remittal
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Family Law Human Rights Convention Refugee New Evidence Admissibility Procedural Fairness +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Minister

Respondent

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / RAD Decision on Appeal (allowed in Part; Remitted in Part)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in excluding evidence and refusing procedural fairness to the principal Appellant
  2. 2 Whether new country condition evidence under s.110(4) IRPA is admissible
  3. 3 Whether the minor Appellants face a risk of persecution as part-Tigrayan

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD admitted new country condition and family law evidence under s.110(4) IRPA, found the minor Appellants (part‑Tigrayan) face a serious possibility of persecution and lack state protection and internal flight alternative and are Convention refugees, and remitted the principal Appellant's claim because the RPD erred in excluding family‑membership and domestic violence evidence and failed to consider the totality of her claim but there was insufficient evidence to substitute a finding that she is a Convention refugee.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Set aside the RPD determination for the minor Appellants and substitute a determination that they are Convention refugees
  • Remit the principal Appellant's claim to the Refugee Protection Division to be redetermined by a differently‑constituted panel