TB9-29565

TB9-29565

The RPD erred by selectively relying on documentary evidence and by failing to consider objective materials showing that (a) the Aadhaar system is widely used and may enable locating individuals, and (b) requirements to provide a husband's or father's name routinely impede single women and domestic violence survivors from accessing housing and services; taken together these factors render relocation within India unsafe and unreasonable on a balance of probabilities, so no viable IFA exists and the appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
TB9-29565
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Male Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Female Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 March 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (rad Substitution)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD substitutes its own decision that the appellants are Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Domestic Violence, Convention Refugee Status, Credibility Assessment, Identity Systems (aadhaar), Relocation Feasibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Internal Flight Alternative Domestic Violence Convention Refugee Status Credibility Assessment Identity Systems (aadhaar) +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Male Minor Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Female Minor Appellant

Minister

Respondent

XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (rad Substitution)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) exists in India for the appellants
  2. 2 Whether appellants have established nexus to the Convention as victims of domestic violence and their children
  3. 3 Whether the RPD erred in its treatment of documentary evidence concerning Aadhaar and the difficulties single women face when relocating in India

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD erred by selectively relying on documentary evidence and by failing to consider objective materials showing that (a) the Aadhaar system is widely used and may enable locating individuals, and (b) requirements to provide a husband's or father's name routinely impede single women and domestic violence survivors from accessing housing and services; taken together these factors render relocation within India unsafe and unreasonable on a balance of probabilities, so no viable IFA exists and the appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD substitutes its own decision that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed and substituted decision that the appellants are Convention refugees