MB9-16586

MB9-16586

The appellants failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that they would not have access to adequate state protection in Belgium; therefore the RPD's conclusion that state protection was available is correct and the appeals are dismissed.

Citation
MB9-16586
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Reasons and Decision (january 16, 2020)
Outcome
Appeals dismissed.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Domestic Violence, Burden of Proof, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Domestic Violence State Protection Administrative Law Burden of Proof Standard of Review

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division / Reasons and Decision (january 16, 2020)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants would receive adequate state protection in Belgium
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in assessing state protection
  3. 3 Whether the appellants met the clear and convincing evidence standard

Ratio Decidendi

The appellants failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that they would not have access to adequate state protection in Belgium; therefore the RPD's conclusion that state protection was available is correct and the appeals are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed.

Orders

  • The four appeals are dismissed.