B. complained on behalf on his minor daughters, C. and D., for the rejection of the application for international protection in Iceland based on art. 37 of Act no. 80/2016 (refugee status) by the Immigration Appeals Board and the refusal to be granted a residence permit in humanitarian grounds based on art. 74 of the same Act. They complained that the determining authority and the district court did not correctly assess their situation and the investigation of the case was not duly conducted. The Supreme Court rejected the appeal and stated that the applicants did not provide evidence of a risk of genital mutilation and rape if returned to their country of origin. According to rule governing the treatment of civil cases, the burden of proof lies with the applicants not with the court. Although it was agreed with the applicants that the situation in the country of origin must be assessed at it is now and not at the moment when the negative decision was first issued, the Supreme Court found that the applicants did not adduce any evidence to demonstrate that the circumstances have changed.