TC5-10627

TC5-10627

The appeal is allowed and the RAD substitutes its decision: the Principal Respondent and SO are excluded under Article 1E because they possess permanent resident status in France and have not rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection there; FG and MG are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection because they face insufficient risk and the presumption of state protection in France stands.

Citation
TC5-10627
Parties
Appellant: Minister (Appellant); Principal Respondent: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent (so): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent (fg): XXXX XXXX; Respondent (mg): XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (substitution of RPD Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that PR and SO are excluded under Article 1E; FG and MG are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, State Protection, Risk Assessment, Standard of Review, Gender Based Violence, Minor Applicants
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Article 1 E Exclusion State Protection Risk Assessment Standard of Review Gender Based Violence +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 6 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Minister (Appellant)

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Respondent

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Respondent (so)

XXXX XXXX

Respondent (fg)

XXXX XXXX

Respondent (mg)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (substitution of RPD Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Principal Respondent and SO are excluded under Article 1E because they have status in France
  2. 2 Whether FG and MG are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection was available in France

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is allowed and the RAD substitutes its decision: the Principal Respondent and SO are excluded under Article 1E because they possess permanent resident status in France and have not rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection there; FG and MG are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection because they face insufficient risk and the presumption of state protection in France stands.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that PR and SO are excluded under Article 1E; FG and MG are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • The RAD's decision substituting the RPD decision: PR and SO are excluded under Article 1E of the Convention; FG and MG are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.