VA5-02090

The claim is rejected because the tribunal found the alleged nexus between the shooting and earlier political/paramilitary persecution to be speculative, the claimant failed to prove a genuine subjective fear (abandonment of multiple prior claims undermines credibility), and the remaining risk is generalized gang violence which does not meet the statutory threshold under sections 96 or 97 of the IRPA.

Citation: VA5-02090
Parties: Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Refugee Protection Officer: David Young; Panel: Carolyn McCool
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 21 September 2006
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Claim / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division
Outcome: Claimant's application for refugee protection denied under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Legal Topics: Convention Refugee, Risk to Life, Persecution, Credibility, Exclusion (article 1 F(b)), Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Safe Third Country
Source Language: English

Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Risk to Life Persecution Credibility Exclusion (article 1 F(b)) +3 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

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

David Young

Refugee Protection Officer

Carolyn McCool

Panel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee
2 Whether the claimant faces a risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment or punishment under sections 96 or 97 of the IRPA
3 Whether there is a nexus between the harm feared and a protected ground

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claimant's application for refugee protection denied under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.