VB1-02259

VB1-02259

The claimant's evidence was found not credible due to contradictions, omissions and implausibilities, and conflicted with reliable country documentation; on that basis and on available documentary evidence the panel found no well-founded fear of persecution under s.96, no personal risk under s.97(1), and no substantial grounds to believe risk of torture, and therefore rejected the claim.

Citation
VB1-02259
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (oral Reasons 24 Nov 2011; Written Decision 28 Dec 2011)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Country Documentation, Safe Third Country, Detention on Entry, Political Opinion, Torture Risk
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Country Documentation Safe Third Country Detention on Entry +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (oral Reasons 24 Nov 2011; Written Decision 28 Dec 2011)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97(1) of the IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of the claimant's membership and persecution allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's evidence was found not credible due to contradictions, omissions and implausibilities, and conflicted with reliable country documentation; on that basis and on available documentary evidence the panel found no well-founded fear of persecution under s.96, no personal risk under s.97(1), and no substantial grounds to believe risk of torture, and therefore rejected the claim.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Claim dismissed under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; no protection granted