TB9-10061

TB9-10061

The RPD gave disproportionate weight to minor credibility concerns and insufficient weight to reliable and probative third‑party documentary evidence; on a holistic assessment the Appellants are credible on a balance of probabilities, face a serious possibility of persecution for Convention reasons (political opinion and family association), and lack adequate state protection or a viable internal flight alternative, therefore they are Convention refugees.

Citation
TB9-10061
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 May 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (substituting RPD Decision)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside; substituted decision that Appellants are Convention refugees.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Documentary Corroboration, Convention Refugee Status, Political Opinion, Particular Social Group (family Association), State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Documentary Corroboration Convention Refugee Status Political Opinion Particular Social Group (family Association) +2 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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal Decision by Refugee Appeal Division (substituting RPD Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Refugee Protection Division erred in its negative credibility findings
  2. 2 Whether the RPD improperly weighed and dismissed corroborative documentary evidence
  3. 3 Whether the Appellants meet the criteria for Convention refugee status based on political opinion and family association

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD gave disproportionate weight to minor credibility concerns and insufficient weight to reliable and probative third‑party documentary evidence; on a holistic assessment the Appellants are credible on a balance of probabilities, face a serious possibility of persecution for Convention reasons (political opinion and family association), and lack adequate state protection or a viable internal flight alternative, therefore they are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside; substituted decision that Appellants are Convention refugees.

Orders

  • Allow the appeal
  • Set aside the Refugee Protection Division decision