TB7-13068

TB7-13068

The RAD found the cumulative discrimination suffered by the Roma appellants constituted past persecution on the Convention ground of ethnicity and that state protection in Hungary was inadequate such that there is more than a mere possibility of future persecution; accordingly, under paragraph 111(1)(b) IRPA the RPD decision was set aside and substituted with a finding that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
TB7-13068
Parties
Appellant: Principal Appellant (name redacted); Appellant: Husband (name redacted); Appellant: Child 1 (minor, name redacted); Appellant: Child 2 (minor, name redacted); Appellant: Child 3 (minor, name redacted)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division From Refugee Protection Division Decision; RAD Substituted Decision
Outcome
RPD decision set aside; RAD substituted a determination that the appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Persecution Vs Discrimination, State Protection, Convention Refugee Status, Admissibility of New Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Law Persecution Vs Discrimination State Protection Convention Refugee Status Admissibility of New Evidence

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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal Appellant (name redacted)

Appellant

Husband (name redacted)

Appellant

Child 1 (minor, name redacted)

Appellant

Child 2 (minor, name redacted)

Appellant

Child 3 (minor, name redacted)

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division From Refugee Protection Division Decision; RAD Substituted Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in treating cumulative discriminatory acts as discrimination rather than persecution
  2. 2 Whether the RPD failed to consider persons similarly situated to the appellants
  3. 3 Whether the RPD failed to consider political opinion ground related to the PA's activism

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD found the cumulative discrimination suffered by the Roma appellants constituted past persecution on the Convention ground of ethnicity and that state protection in Hungary was inadequate such that there is more than a mere possibility of future persecution; accordingly, under paragraph 111(1)(b) IRPA the RPD decision was set aside and substituted with a finding that the appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

RPD decision set aside; RAD substituted a determination that the appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

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