MA9-11417

MA9-11417

The claim was rejected because the alleged harm arose from non-protected motives (revenge) so s.96 did not apply, and although s.97(1)(b) could address a risk to life, the panel found the claimant's account not credible on multiple grounds (implausibility, internal contradictions, lack of corroboration and evidence of the alleged agents' capacity), therefore she is not a person in need of protection.

Citation
MA9-11417
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Marie-José Blain; Adjudicator: José wa Tshisungu Tshisungu; Minister's Counsel: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Grounds, Credibility Assessment, Risk to Life, State Protection, Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Convention Grounds Credibility Assessment Risk to Life State Protection Persecution

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Me Marie-José Blain

Claimant's Counsel

José wa Tshisungu Tshisungu

Adjudicator

N/A

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant qualifies as a Convention refugee under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1)(b) of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's allegations are credible and supported by evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was rejected because the alleged harm arose from non-protected motives (revenge) so s.96 did not apply, and although s.97(1)(b) could address a risk to life, the panel found the claimant's account not credible on multiple grounds (implausibility, internal contradictions, lack of corroboration and evidence of the alleged agents' capacity), therefore she is not a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a person in need of protection.