MA9-02334

MA9-02334

The Tribunal concluded the claimants failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that they are convention refugees or persons in need of protection because their account lacked overall plausibility and, even if accepted, a viable and reasonable internal flight alternative existed in Monterrey making relocation a realistic and safer option.

Citation
MA9-02334
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXXX; Associated Claimant: XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Convention Refugee and Protected Person Determination Under IRPA / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claimants' refugee claims denied; not convention refugees and not persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Denunciation to Authorities
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Criminal Law (drug Trafficking) Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Internal Flight Alternative State Protection +2 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXX

Associated Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Convention Refugee and Protected Person Determination Under IRPA / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are convention refugees under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97 of IRPA
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative (IFA) exists and is reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal concluded the claimants failed to establish, on a balance of probabilities, that they are convention refugees or persons in need of protection because their account lacked overall plausibility and, even if accepted, a viable and reasonable internal flight alternative existed in Monterrey making relocation a realistic and safer option.

Court Disposition

Claimants' refugee claims denied; not convention refugees and not persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Claimants' refugee claims dismissed