MA5-07297

The panel rejected the claim because it concluded the claimants were not credible: material inconsistencies, omissions and implausibilities in testimony and documentary evidence eliminated probative value, so the legal tests in s.96 and s.97 IRPA were not satisfied and protection was denied.

Citation: MA5-07297
Parties: Claimant: Miguel Carlos Gonzalez Morales; Claimant: Maria Dolores Gomez Basanta
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 12 January 2007
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Claim (rpd) / Hearing and Determination Decision Rejecting Claim
Outcome: Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics: Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Persecution, Threats and Assault, Corruption/non‑state Actors, Documentary Corroboration
Source Language: English

Immigration Law Refugee Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Persecution Threats and Assault Corruption/non‑state Actors +1 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

Parties

Miguel Carlos Gonzalez Morales

Claimant

Maria Dolores Gomez Basanta

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (rpd) / Hearing and Determination Decision Rejecting Claim

Legal Issues

1 Whether claimants qualify as Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA
2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
3 Whether claimants' testimony and documents are credible and probative

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.