2019 RLLR 38

2019 RLLR 38

The tribunal found that the claimants faced a serious possibility of persecution on the ground of membership in a particular social group (women at risk of sexual violence and forced marriage and a child at risk), that state protection would not be reasonably forthcoming, and that proposed internal flight alternatives were objectively unreasonable in the claimants’ circumstances; therefore the claimants qualify as Convention refugees.

Citation
2019 RLLR 38
Parties
Principal Claimant: [XXX]; Minor Claimant: [XXX]
Court
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour Relations
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 December 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Refugee Protection Division Decision
Outcome
Claims allowed; claimants found to be Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution, State Protection, Particular Social Group, Forced Marriage, Sexual Violence, Ritual Practices, Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based Persecution +6 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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

[XXX]

Principal Claimant

[XXX]

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Refugee Protection Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants face a well-founded fear of persecution
  2. 2 Whether persecution is on a Convention ground (membership in a particular social group)
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection is available

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal found that the claimants faced a serious possibility of persecution on the ground of membership in a particular social group (women at risk of sexual violence and forced marriage and a child at risk), that state protection would not be reasonably forthcoming, and that proposed internal flight alternatives were objectively unreasonable in the claimants’ circumstances; therefore the claimants qualify as Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Claims allowed; claimants found to be Convention refugees

Orders

  • Convention refugee protection granted to the principal and minor claimants
  • Designation of [XXX] maintained as representative for the minor claimant pursuant to subsection 167(2) of the Act and RPD Rule 20