TB9-11736

TB9-11736

The affidavit demonstrating the Principal Appellant would return as a divorced single mother, together with updated objective country evidence showing relocation would be relatively difficult for single/divorced women and the Associate Appellant's disability plus the Principal Appellant's mental health limitations, make relocation to the identified IFA locations unduly harsh; state protection is not available; the affidavit is admissible as new evidence; accordingly the RPD's IFA finding fails and the appellants qualify as Convention refugees.

Citation
TB9-11736
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal (refugee Appeal Division)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside RPD decision and finds appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, New Evidence Admissibility, Convention Refugee Status, Female Genital Mutilation, Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Internal Flight Alternative State Protection New Evidence Admissibility Convention Refugee Status Female Genital Mutilation +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision on Appeal (refugee Appeal Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Viability of Internal Flight Alternative (IFA)
  2. 2 Availability and effectiveness of state protection
  3. 3 Admissibility of new evidence under s.110(4) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The affidavit demonstrating the Principal Appellant would return as a divorced single mother, together with updated objective country evidence showing relocation would be relatively difficult for single/divorced women and the Associate Appellant's disability plus the Principal Appellant's mental health limitations, make relocation to the identified IFA locations unduly harsh; state protection is not available; the affidavit is admissible as new evidence; accordingly the RPD's IFA finding fails and the appellants qualify as Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RAD sets aside RPD decision and finds appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

  • Set aside the Refugee Protection Division decision dated May 28, 2019
  • Substitute RAD determination that the appellants are Convention refugees pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(b) of the IRPA