MA6-07717

The claimant failed to meet his onus under s.97 IRPA because the panel found his testimony evasive and inconsistent, key allegations lacked documentary or reliable corroboration, and the medical evidence was insufficiently verified; therefore he is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection.

Citation: MA6-07717
Parties: Claimant (asylum Seeker): XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent (minister): Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 24 April 2009
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection S.97 IRPA / Decision (merits Hearing)
Outcome: Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.
Legal Topics: Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Identity Documents, Medical Evidence, Corroboration, State Protection
Source Language: English

Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Identity Documents +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

Claimant (asylum Seeker)

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection S.97 IRPA / Decision (merits Hearing)

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimant met the onus under s.97 IRPA to prove risk of persecution
2 Credibility and reliability of claimant's testimony
3 Weight and sufficiency of documentary and medical corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Orders

Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimant's claim