MB9-22724

The RPD erred in its credibility assessment by applying inappropriate standards; the female appellant's testimony was credible on the balance of probabilities, state protection and IFA are inadequate or unreasonable, and therefore the appellants face a real risk if returned and are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Citation: MB9-22724
Parties: Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court: Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 29 September 2020
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division
Outcome: Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted
Legal Topics: Credibility Assessment, Particular Social Group Women, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution
Source Language: English

Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Credibility Assessment Particular Social Group Women State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based Persecution

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal / Decision by Refugee Appeal Division

Legal Issues

1 Did the Refugee Protection Division err in its assessment of the female appellant's credibility?
2 Whether the appellants face a real risk of persecution if returned to Haiti
3 Whether state protection and an internal flight alternative are available to the appellants

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; RPD decision set aside and substituted

Orders

Set aside the Refugee Protection Division's determination
Substitute determination that XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX are persons in need of protection under section 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act