MB0-02610

MB0-02610

Claimants' applications were rejected because the panel found them not credible (contradictions and late narrative additions), objective documentary evidence showed generalized criminality motivated by economic reasons rather than racially‑targeted persecution, no nexus to a Convention ground was established, no personal risk for section 97 was proven, and state protection was not shown to be unavailable or ineffective.

Citation
MB0-02610
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXX XXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Claims for refugee protection denied; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Particular Social Group, Gender Based Violence, Internal Flight Alternative
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment State Protection Particular Social Group +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants fear persecution on account of race (being white)
  2. 2 Whether female claimants fear persecution as members of a particular social group (women) because of risk of rape
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are credible

Ratio Decidendi

Claimants' applications were rejected because the panel found them not credible (contradictions and late narrative additions), objective documentary evidence showed generalized criminality motivated by economic reasons rather than racially‑targeted persecution, no nexus to a Convention ground was established, no personal risk for section 97 was proven, and state protection was not shown to be unavailable or ineffective.

Court Disposition

Claims for refugee protection denied; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Claims for refugee protection rejected