MB9-09762

MB9-09762

The RAD found appellants did not have a safe IFA because credible evidence showed the persecutory family could locate them (including via social media) and there was a real risk of FGM; therefore the RPD's IFA finding failed and the RAD allowed the appeal, substituting its own determination that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
MB9-09762
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX; XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision Reasons and Decision Issued March 3, 2020
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside the RPD determination and substitutes its own finding that the appellants are Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Female Genital Mutilation, Procedural Fairness, Credibility Assessment, Jurisprudential Guide Application
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Protection Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Female Genital Mutilation Procedural Fairness Credibility Assessment Jurisprudential Guide Application

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX; XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellants

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision Reasons and Decision Issued March 3, 2020

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a safe Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) exists for the appellants
  2. 2 Whether procedural fairness was breached by lack of advance notice of IFA and proposed cities
  3. 3 Whether the RAD/RPD properly applied a Jurisprudential Guide (JG) and considered indigeneship

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found appellants did not have a safe IFA because credible evidence showed the persecutory family could locate them (including via social media) and there was a real risk of FGM; therefore the RPD's IFA finding failed and the RAD allowed the appeal, substituting its own determination that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside the RPD determination and substitutes its own finding that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Orders

  • Pursuant to section 111(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the RAD sets aside the RPD determination and substitutes its own determination that the appellants are Convention refugees.