TA5-04569

TA5-04569

Although the claimants' testimony was found credible, the evidence showed primarily criminal acts by an individual rather than persecution on a Convention ground; Argentina provides adequate state protection and a viable internal flight alternative exists; therefore the claimants did not demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution and the refugee claims fail.

Citation
TA5-04569
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Designated Representative: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Dependent Child: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claims rejected
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Persecution, Particular Social Group / Family, Domestic Violence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Family Law Criminal Law Convention Refugee State Protection Internal Flight Alternative +4 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Designated Representative

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Dependent Child

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Credibility of claimants' testimony
  2. 2 Whether state protection in Argentina is available and effective
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative exists

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimants' testimony was found credible, the evidence showed primarily criminal acts by an individual rather than persecution on a Convention ground; Argentina provides adequate state protection and a viable internal flight alternative exists; therefore the claimants did not demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution and the refugee claims fail.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected

Orders

  • The refugee protection claims are rejected.