TA4-02044

TA4-02044

On the totality of the evidence — including Interpol communications, Chinese court documentation, corroborating translated materials, expert commentary, and the claimant's inconsistent, evasive and at times dishonest testimony and prior misrepresentations to Canadian officials — there exist serious reasons for considering the claimant was complicit in large-scale contract fraud in China; therefore the claimant is excluded from refugee protection under Article 1F(b) of the 1951 Refugee Convention as incorporated into Canadian law (IRPA s.98).

Citation
TA4-02044
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent / Minister: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration; Refugee Protection Officer: E. Lerner; Panel Member / Tribunal: Tom Pinkney
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim With Minister's Intervention Seeking Exclusion Under Article 1 F(b) / Exclusion Determination (decision)
Outcome
Claimant excluded from refugee protection under Article 1F(b) of the 1951 Refugee Convention (as implemented in IRPA s.98)
Legal Topics
Article 1 F(b) Exclusion, Serious Non Political Crime, Fraud, Minister's Intervention, Dual Nationality, Credibility and Misrepresentation, Risk of Prosecution / Death Penalty, Interpol Notice
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Criminal Law International Law Article 1 F(b) Exclusion Serious Non Political Crime Fraud +5 more

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 4 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent / Minister

E. Lerner

Refugee Protection Officer

Tom Pinkney

Panel Member / Tribunal

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim With Minister's Intervention Seeking Exclusion Under Article 1 F(b) / Exclusion Determination (decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are serious reasons for considering the claimant committed serious non-political crimes (contract fraud) outside country of refuge prior to admission
  2. 2 Whether alleged conduct would amount to fraud under Canadian Criminal Code s.380 if committed in Canada
  3. 3 Assessment of credibility and reliability of claimant's evidence and explanations

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of the evidence — including Interpol communications, Chinese court documentation, corroborating translated materials, expert commentary, and the claimant's inconsistent, evasive and at times dishonest testimony and prior misrepresentations to Canadian officials — there exist serious reasons for considering the claimant was complicit in large-scale contract fraud in China; therefore the claimant is excluded from refugee protection under Article 1F(b) of the 1951 Refugee Convention as incorporated into Canadian law (IRPA s.98).

Court Disposition

Claimant excluded from refugee protection under Article 1F(b) of the 1951 Refugee Convention (as implemented in IRPA s.98)

Orders

  • Claimant excluded from refugee determination; no refugee protection granted