MA8-07141

MA8-07141

The RPD found the claimants were subject to generalized gang-related criminality throughout Honduras, failed to adduce evidence that the harm was on account of a Convention ground or that gangs exercise direct or indirect control of the state; therefore the claimants did not meet the legal tests under s.96 or s.97(1)(b) of IRPA and their claims were rejected.

Citation
MA8-07141
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Leslie Morley; Decision‑maker (rpd Member): William Davis; Tribunal Officer: Josée Besner; Respondent (no Appearance): Minister's Counsel
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / RPD Hearing and Decision (first Instance)
Outcome
Claims rejected: claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b) of IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection (s.97(1)(b)), Nexus to Convention Grounds, Generalized Risk, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection (s.97(1)(b)) Nexus to Convention Grounds Generalized Risk Internal Flight Alternative +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX

Claimant

Leslie Morley

Claimant's Counsel

William Davis

Decision‑maker (rpd Member)

Josée Besner

Tribunal Officer

Minister's Counsel

Respondent (no Appearance)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / RPD Hearing and Decision (first Instance)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees under s.96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b) of IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the harm feared has a nexus to a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD found the claimants were subject to generalized gang-related criminality throughout Honduras, failed to adduce evidence that the harm was on account of a Convention ground or that gangs exercise direct or indirect control of the state; therefore the claimants did not meet the legal tests under s.96 or s.97(1)(b) of IRPA and their claims were rejected.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected: claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b) of IRPA

Orders

  • The claims of XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXXX XXXXX XXXXXXX XXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX and XXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXXX are rejected