MA9-08976

MA9-08976

The claims were rejected because the tribunal found the claimants not credible due to material omissions and contradictions in testimony and documents; on that basis the claimants failed to establish the required 'serious possibility' of persecution under s.96 or on a balance of probabilities a risk to life, torture or cruel and unusual treatment under s.97.

Citation
MA9-08976
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Spouse Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa) / Decision (hearing Concluded)
Outcome
Claimants' refugee protection claims rejected.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility, Persecution by Non State Actors, State Protection, Domestic Violence, Harm From Drug Trafficking Groups
Source Language
English

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Spouse Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa) / Decision (hearing Concluded)

  1. 1 Whether claimants meet the definition of Convention refugee under IRPA s.96
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under IRPA s.97(1)
  3. 3 Credibility and weight of testimonial and documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claims were rejected because the tribunal found the claimants not credible due to material omissions and contradictions in testimony and documents; on that basis the claimants failed to establish the required 'serious possibility' of persecution under s.96 or on a balance of probabilities a risk to life, torture or cruel and unusual treatment under s.97.

Court Disposition

Claimants' refugee protection claims rejected.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims of both applicants are rejected.
  • Rejection of principal claimant's claim applies to spouse whose claim was based on his claim; no separation of files was made.