MB1-03138

MB1-03138

The panel rejected the claim because it found the claimant not credible on central aspects of her narrative, attached no probative value to key corroborating documents and letters, accepted evidence that the alleged principal agent of persecution is deceased, and concluded the claimant failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground or a risk under subsection 97(1).

Citation
MB1-03138
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Stewart Istvanffy; Minister's Counsel: Farah Merali; Chairperson/panel: Renée Bourque
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Claim Rejected)
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Gender Related Persecution, Female Genital Mutilation, Forced Marriage, Sexual Assault
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Gender Related Persecution +3 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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Me Stewart Istvanffy

Claimant's Counsel

Farah Merali

Minister's Counsel

Renée Bourque

Chairperson/panel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Claim Rejected)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility and probative value of documentary and testimonial evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because it found the claimant not credible on central aspects of her narrative, attached no probative value to key corroborating documents and letters, accepted evidence that the alleged principal agent of persecution is deceased, and concluded the claimant failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground or a risk under subsection 97(1).

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim of XXXX XXXX is rejected; no protection granted