MA9-11244

MA9-11244

The Tribunal dismissed the claim because the claimant's narrative contained significant implausibilities and lacked corroboration, the country evidence did not support the alleged systemic risk or police hostility, and a viable internal flight alternative existed; therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97(1).

Citation
MA9-11244
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Adjudicator: Me Edward Aronoff
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 May 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed: claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) of the Act.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Freedom of Religion, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility/implausibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Freedom of Religion 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Me Edward Aronoff

Adjudicator

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution based on religion
  2. 2 Whether there is nexus between alleged persecution and protected ground (religion)
  3. 3 Credibility and need for corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal dismissed the claim because the claimant's narrative contained significant implausibilities and lacked corroboration, the country evidence did not support the alleged systemic risk or police hostility, and a viable internal flight alternative existed; therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97(1).

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed: claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) of the Act.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim denied; no protection order granted