Court: Failing to Seek Indian Citizenship Fatal to Tibetan Refugee Claim
- Citation
- 2026 FC 965
- Decided
- Court file
- IMM-21731-24
- Full judgment
- Read the decision
Case Law Overview
Thandyi Dolma v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 965
The applicant, a Tibetan Buddhist with Chinese citizenship by descent but born and raised in India, filed a refugee claim against China. Her claim was refused because she had a legal right to Indian citizenship but had not taken steps to exercise it, as she would lose benefits from the Central Tibetan Authority (CTA).
Court Ruling
The Federal Court dismissed the application for judicial review, finding the Refugee Appeal Division's (RAD) decision was reasonable. The Court affirmed that a claimant must take reasonable steps to seek protection in a country where they have a right to citizenship before they can be granted refugee protection in Canada.
Key Quote from the Court
While I agree that the RAD did not address specifically the question of discrimination against Tibetans who do not live in settlements, this does not amount, in my view, to a sufficiently serious shortcoming in the decision that would demand this Court's intervention... This is so because Ms. Dolma does not make a claim that she will be persecuted in India. Accordingly, Ms. Dolma is required to take reasonable steps to seek state protection – a mere unwillingness to do so is insufficient... (at para 24)
Expert Takeaways
-
Burden of Proof is on the Claimant If you have a potential right to citizenship in a country other than your country of alleged persecution, the onus is on you to prove you have taken 'reasonable steps' to secure that citizenship and its protection. Simply stating it is difficult is not enough.
-
Unwillingness vs. Inability A mere unwillingness to seek citizenship, perhaps due to the loss of certain benefits or community status, is not a valid reason for refugee protection. You must demonstrate that acquiring citizenship is beyond your control due to significant, insurmountable impediments.
-
Individual Circumstances Matter The Court will assess what constitutes 'reasonable steps' based on your specific profile. An educated individual living in a major city is held to a higher standard of inquiry than someone with limited education living in a remote settlement.
-
Ignorance of the Law is No Excuse Claiming you were unaware of your citizenship rights is a weak argument and will likely be rejected by the Court, especially if your personal profile suggests you could have made inquiries.
There is a deadline on this
That is the window to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review at the Federal Court, counted from the day you were notified of the decision. An extension can be requested, but it is granted at the Court's discretion - it is not automatic.
Check my deadlineDoes this ruling apply to your situation?
Tick whatever is true for you. Nothing is sent anywhere - this stays in your browser.
That combination is worth a proper look. It does not mean you have a case - only a lawyer reading your actual documents can say that - but it does mean the question is worth asking before your filing window closes.
Disclaimer
The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Immigration law is complex and subject to change. For advice specific to your situation, please schedule a consultation with a qualified legal professional.
Refused by IRCC?
You may have only 15 to 60 days to challenge the decision. Speak with our team before the deadline passes.
No obligation - we review your documents and tell you if a Federal Court application is realistic.
Questions people ask after reading a case like this
Does this mean my own case will succeed?
No. Every application is decided on its own record. A reported decision shows how the Federal Court has reasoned about a particular kind of error - it does not predict the result of a different file. What it can tell you is whether the problem in your refusal is the kind of problem the Court has been willing to intervene on.
How long do I have to challenge a refusal?
Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act you generally have 15 days to file an Application for Leave and for Judicial Review if the decision was made inside Canada, and 60 days if it was made outside Canada, counted from when you were notified. The Court can extend that period, but an extension is discretionary - it is not automatic.
What actually happens at the Federal Court?
Judicial review has two stages. You file the application and a written record, and a judge decides on paper whether to grant leave - permission for the case to proceed. If leave is granted, there is a hearing. The Court does not re-decide your immigration application; it decides whether the officer's decision was reasonable and procedurally fair. If you succeed, the file is normally sent back to be decided again by a different officer.
Do I have to be in Canada to bring an application?
No. Applicants outside Canada regularly bring judicial review applications, which is why the longer 60-day deadline exists for decisions made abroad. Applicants are not normally required to attend in person.
What happens in the free 15-minute review?
You explain what was refused or delayed and when you were notified. We tell you whether your filing window is still open, which issues in the decision look arguable, and what the realistic options are - including reapplying instead of litigating, where that is the better route. There is no obligation to retain us afterwards.
More Refugee Claim / Asylum rulings
Federal Court: IRCC's Delays Cannot Justify Further Delays in Refugee PR Case
Federal Court: Failure to Prove Identity is Fatal to a Refugee Claim
Federal Court: Inconsistent Testimony Fatal to Refugee Credibility
Federal Court Overturns Unfair SOGIE Refugee Decision, Citing Serious Errors
Written by
Ali Dadkhah
Ali Dadkhah is a litigator whose practice is dedicated to challenging government decisions at the Federal Court of Canada. He specializes in judicial review, providing a crucial avenue for recourse for individuals and businesses who have faced unfair or unreasonable administrative outcomes. Bilingual legal support in English and Persian (Farsi)