MA4-07785

MA4-07785

The panel rejected the claimant's testimony as not credible due to a material contradiction between the claimant's hearing narrative and his immigration interview notes, and because corroborative evidence was absent or self-serving; on that basis the claimant failed to satisfy the legal tests in ss.96 and 97 IRPA and the claim was rejected.

Citation
MA4-07785
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Styliani (Stacey) Markaki; Designated Representative: XXXXX XXXXX (SARIMM); Refugee Protection Officer: Jocelyne Senecal; Presiding Member: Jean Prévost
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection; claim has no credible basis.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility, Contradictions in Testimony, Persecution of Family Members, Minor Claimant, Designated Representative, Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Contradictions in Testimony Persecution of Family Members Minor Claimant +2 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Styliani (Stacey) Markaki

Claimant's Counsel

XXXXX XXXXX (SARIMM)

Designated Representative

Jocelyne Senecal

Refugee Protection Officer

Jean Prévost

Presiding Member

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is credible
  2. 2 Whether the claimant faces a well-founded fear of persecution for Convention grounds
  3. 3 Whether the claimant faces a risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment under s.97 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claimant's testimony as not credible due to a material contradiction between the claimant's hearing narrative and his immigration interview notes, and because corroborative evidence was absent or self-serving; on that basis the claimant failed to satisfy the legal tests in ss.96 and 97 IRPA and the claim was rejected.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection; claim has no credible basis.