TB0-08898

TB0-08898

The Panel rejected the claim because the claimant's testimony contained multiple unexplained material inconsistencies and he failed to produce corroborative documentary evidence that was reasonably available (notably medical records and the alleged internet publication). Those credibility findings led to the conclusion that the claimant did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution under s.96 nor a risk to life or risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment on return under s.97.

Citation
TB0-08898
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Decision After Hearing (refused)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility, Sur Place, Torture, Detention, Corroboration, Well Founded Fear
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Sur Place Torture +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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Decision After Hearing (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of claimant's account

Ratio Decidendi

The Panel rejected the claim because the claimant's testimony contained multiple unexplained material inconsistencies and he failed to produce corroborative documentary evidence that was reasonably available (notably medical records and the alleged internet publication). Those credibility findings led to the conclusion that the claimant did not establish a well-founded fear of persecution under s.96 nor a risk to life or risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment on return under s.97.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA

Orders

  • Claim rejected under ss.96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act