MB4-03620

MB4-03620

The principal claimant was excluded under Article 1E because he held Chilean permanent resident status substantially similar to the rights of Chilean nationals (right to return, to work and study, and access to services) and failed to prove on a balance of probabilities, with clear and convincing evidence, that he could not avail himself of Chilean protection. The female claimant's testimony was found not credible due to multiple omissions and contradictions, and she failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground; therefore neither claimant is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection under IRPA s.98.

Citation
MB4-03620
Parties
Claimant (principal): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Claimant (spouse/common Law): XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent (minister): Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Refugee claims rejected; principal claimant excluded under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention; both claimants found not to be Convention refugees or persons in need of protection under IRPA s.98.
Legal Topics
Article 1 E Exclusion, Credibility Assessment, International Protection, IRPA S.98
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Article 1 E Exclusion Credibility Assessment International Protection IRPA S.98

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 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant (principal)

XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant (spouse/common Law)

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration Canada

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether principal claimant is excluded from refugee protection under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention due to Chilean permanent resident status
  2. 2 Whether adequate protection is available in Chile to the principal claimant
  3. 3 Whether the female claimant's claim is credible and establishes a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The principal claimant was excluded under Article 1E because he held Chilean permanent resident status substantially similar to the rights of Chilean nationals (right to return, to work and study, and access to services) and failed to prove on a balance of probabilities, with clear and convincing evidence, that he could not avail himself of Chilean protection. The female claimant's testimony was found not credible due to multiple omissions and contradictions, and she failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground; therefore neither claimant is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection under IRPA s.98.

Court Disposition

Refugee claims rejected; principal claimant excluded under Article 1E of the 1951 Convention; both claimants found not to be Convention refugees or persons in need of protection under IRPA s.98.