TB1-03667

TB1-03667

The panel rejected the claims because the claimants' testimony lacked specificity and corroboration, there was no established personal nexus between the alleged fear/harassment and a Convention ground, and a negative inference was drawn from the failure to produce German documentation; on the balance of probabilities the claimants were economic migrants rather than Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB1-03667
Parties
Principal Claimant / Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX; Claimant (husband): XXXX XXXX; Claimant (minor): XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa S.96 and S.97(1)) / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Claimants' refugee claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Credibility and Corroboration, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Negative Inference From Failure to Produce Evidence, Economic Migration Vs Convention Protection, Procedural Objections (recusal, Interpreter Presence)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Credibility and Corroboration Nexus to Convention Grounds Negative Inference From Failure to Produce Evidence Economic Migration Vs Convention Protection +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant / Designated Representative

XXXX XXXX

Claimant (husband)

XXXX XXXX

Claimant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa S.96 and S.97(1)) / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants meet definition of Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of claimant testimony and adequacy of corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claims because the claimants' testimony lacked specificity and corroboration, there was no established personal nexus between the alleged fear/harassment and a Convention ground, and a negative inference was drawn from the failure to produce German documentation; on the balance of probabilities the claimants were economic migrants rather than Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claimants' refugee claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA

Orders

  • The Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of the claimants; no protection granted