Abstract
This article overviews outcomes in different types of refugee claims in Canada. It critiques standard legal research methodologies in the refugee law field due to skews in publication practices. To address these skews, the article employs empirical quantitative research methods using administrative tribunal data and computational methods. It provides a snapshot of refugee claim numbers, countries of origin, claim categories, and outcomes. The article then underscores the benefits of supplementing doctrinal legal research with empirical quantitative research methods, outlines barriers to the adoption of such methods, and offers guidance and tools to assist other researchers in overcoming those barriers.
Publisher
York University Libraries
Reference77 articles.
1. Access to Information Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. A-1, s. 19(1).
2. Alarie, B., & Aidid, A. (2023). The legal singularity: How artificial intelligence can make law radically better. University of Toronto Press.
3. Arbel, E. (2013). The culture of rights protection in Canadian refugee law: Examining the domestic violence cases. McGill Law Journal, 58(3), 729–771.
4. Atak, I., Alroh, Z. A., & Ellis, C. (2021). Expanding refugee ineligibility: Canada’s response to secondary refugee movements. Journal of Refugee Studies, 34(3), 2593–2612. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/feaa103
5. Bains v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), (1990) 47 Admin LR 317.