TB1-05794

TB1-05794

Panel rejected the claim because the claimant's evidence lacked credibility and objective corroboration, country and fact‑finding reports and UNHCR guidance do not support a presumption of risk for his profile, there is insufficient evidence he would be perceived as linked to the LTTE (including by virtue of travel aboard the Sun Sea), and on the balance of probabilities he is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TB1-05794
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent/minister: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 January 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa) / Final Decision (merits Hearing)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Sur Place, Failed Asylum Seekers, Non‑refoulement, IRPA Sections 96 and 97
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law International Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment +4 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)

Respondent/minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa) / Final Decision (merits Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97(1)(a) or (b) of IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility and reliability of claimant's testimony and documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Panel rejected the claim because the claimant's evidence lacked credibility and objective corroboration, country and fact‑finding reports and UNHCR guidance do not support a presumption of risk for his profile, there is insufficient evidence he would be perceived as linked to the LTTE (including by virtue of travel aboard the Sun Sea), and on the balance of probabilities he is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.

Orders

  • Claimant's refugee claim rejected.
  • Reasoned decision signed January 7, 2013 by Anthony P. da Silva.