TA9-24430
The claim fails because the panel found the claimant not credible due to material inconsistencies and falsehoods, and he failed to rebut the presumption of available effective state protection in Georgia; on that basis there is no well-founded fear of persecution nor a balance of probabilities risk under s.97(1)(b).
- Citation
- TA9-24430
- Parties
- Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX
- Court
- Refugee Protection Division
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 8 August 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Refugee Protection Claim / Decision on Eligibility Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97(1)(b)
- Outcome
- Claim rejected; not a Convention refugee under s.96 and not a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(b).
- Legal Topics
- Convention Refugee, Protection Claim, State Protection, Credibility, Military Conscription, Extortion, Country Conditions
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
XXXXX XXXXX
Claimant
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision on Eligibility Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97(1)(b)
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
- 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(b) IRPA
- 3 Credibility of claimant's narrative and statements
Ratio Decidendi
The claim fails because the panel found the claimant not credible due to material inconsistencies and falsehoods, and he failed to rebut the presumption of available effective state protection in Georgia; on that basis there is no well-founded fear of persecution nor a balance of probabilities risk under s.97(1)(b).
Court Disposition
Claim rejected; not a Convention refugee under s.96 and not a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(b).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment