TA7-02767

TA7-02767

The panel rejected the claim because, on the balance of probabilities, the claimant was not a member of an underground Christian church and her testimony contained material inconsistencies and omissions indicating lack of good faith; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk on return and she is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TA7-02767
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Designated Representative: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Decision Maker / Refugee Protection Division: Diane L. Tinker; Counsel for the Minister: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (convention Refugee / Person in Need of Protection) / Hearing and Decision (determination)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Religious Persecution, Credibility and Inconsistencies, Child Refugee Claimants, Sur Place / Good Faith, Freedom of Religion, Country Conditions China
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Religious Persecution Credibility and Inconsistencies +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Designated Representative

Diane L. Tinker

Decision Maker / Refugee Protection Division

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (convention Refugee / Person in Need of Protection) / Hearing and Decision (determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether claimant's evidence is credible and made in good faith (sur place issue)

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because, on the balance of probabilities, the claimant was not a member of an underground Christian church and her testimony contained material inconsistencies and omissions indicating lack of good faith; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution or risk on return and she is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection