Odette Desjardins

The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration applied for judicial review of a Refugee Protection Division (RPD) decision granting refugee protection to the respondents.

The RPD had found that the principal respondent, a 24-year veteran of the Indian army, was not excluded from protection for complicity in crimes against humanity.

The Federal Court allowed the application, finding the RPD's decision unreasonable under the Vavilov standard.

The RPD conflated the legal tests for individual responsibility and complicity under Ezokola, and its findings on the merits of the refugee claim lacked justification and transparency.

The matter was remitted to a different panel of the RPD for redetermination.

The applicants, a mother and her two sons, sought judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Appeal Division (RAD) refusing their refugee claims.

The mother's daughters' claims had been accepted based on a fear of being subjected to female genital mutilation by their in-laws in Guinea.

The RAD had found the mother would not face risk if she returned to her country.

The Federal Court allowed the application for judicial review with respect to the mother, finding her claim and her daughters' claims were inextricably linked, rendering the RAD's premise that she could return alone unreasonable.

The application was dismissed with respect to the two sons, as there was no evidence they faced personal risk or that their claims were inextricably linked to the mother's.