TA8-02709

TA8-02709

The panel rejected the claims because the claimant's evidence was not credible and key documentary evidence was found not genuine or unverifiable due to destruction of originals and material omissions; consequently, on the balance of probabilities the claimant would not be personally at risk on return and is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Citation
TA8-02709
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Associated Claimant Spouse: XXXXX XXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXX XXX); Associated Claimant Daughter: XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (s.96 and S.97) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claims dismissed: principal claimant and associated claimants are not Convention refugees under s.96 and not persons in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility, Documentary Evidence Genuineness, State Protection, Political Opinion, Threats and Persecution
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Documentary Evidence Genuineness +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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXX XXX)

Associated Claimant Spouse

XXXXX XXXXX

Associated Claimant Daughter

Procedural Posture

Refugee Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (s.96 and S.97) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
  3. 3 Assessment of claimant credibility

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claims because the claimant's evidence was not credible and key documentary evidence was found not genuine or unverifiable due to destruction of originals and material omissions; consequently, on the balance of probabilities the claimant would not be personally at risk on return and is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed: principal claimant and associated claimants are not Convention refugees under s.96 and not persons in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA.

Orders

  • Refugee claims rejected