TB1-01744

TB1-01744

The panel rejected the claims because the claimants failed to provide credible, trustworthy and sufficient evidence to establish on a balance of probabilities that the principal claimant was targeted for a Convention-protected reason or that they would face a real risk of death, torture or cruel and unusual treatment upon return; absence of nexus and deficient corroboration mandated refusal under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TB1-01744
Parties
Claimant Principal (designated Representative): XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant Minor (daughter): XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision (reasons Following Hearing)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) of the IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Section 97 Protection, Credibility Assessment, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Risk of Torture, Personalized Vs Generalized Risk
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Section 97 Protection Credibility Assessment Nexus to Convention Grounds Risk of Torture +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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant Principal (designated Representative)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant Minor (daughter)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision (reasons Following Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants meet definition of Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA (nexus to a Convention ground)
  2. 2 Whether claimants meet threshold for protection under s.97(1) IRPA (risk to life, torture, or cruel and unusual treatment)
  3. 3 Credibility and sufficiency of documentary corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claims because the claimants failed to provide credible, trustworthy and sufficient evidence to establish on a balance of probabilities that the principal claimant was targeted for a Convention-protected reason or that they would face a real risk of death, torture or cruel and unusual treatment upon return; absence of nexus and deficient corroboration mandated refusal under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) of the IRPA.

Orders

  • Claims for refugee protection rejected