TA6-09762

TA6-09762

The panel concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that the claimants failed to provide credible and corroborated evidence establishing a well-founded fear of persecution or a risk of torture/serious harm on return to China; credibility concerns, material omissions and lack of documentary corroboration led to dismissal of the refugee and protection claims, which the panel characterized as effectively economic migration.

Citation
TA6-09762
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX); Claimant: XXX XXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (convention Refugee Claim) / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Persecution, Political Opinion, Religion, Particular Social Group, Credibility, Corroboration, Economic Migration
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Persecution Political Opinion Religion Particular Social Group +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX)

Claimant

XXX XXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX)

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (convention Refugee Claim) / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether the claimants have demonstrated a well-founded fear of persecution by state actors
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are members or perceived members of a particular social group (Falun Gong supporters)

Ratio Decidendi

The panel concluded, on the balance of probabilities, that the claimants failed to provide credible and corroborated evidence establishing a well-founded fear of persecution or a risk of torture/serious harm on return to China; credibility concerns, material omissions and lack of documentary corroboration led to dismissal of the refugee and protection claims, which the panel characterized as effectively economic migration.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.