CA5-00727

CA5-00727

The claimants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground or, on the balance of probabilities, a risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment; the evidence shows harassment, discrimination and isolated criminal acts but no nexus to a Convention ground and credibility issues undermine the claim; internal resumption of life was reasonable, therefore the claims must be rejected.

Citation
CA5-00727
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Spouse (claimant): XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection under IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Definition, Persecution, Risk of Torture, Discrimination, Harassment, Credibility Assessment, Burden of Proof, Internal Relocation/intra State Flight Alternative, Sexual Assault
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Protection Human Rights Employment Law Gender Based Violence Convention Refugee Definition Persecution Risk of Torture +6 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 5 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Spouse (claimant)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether alleged harms amount to persecution on a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground or, on the balance of probabilities, a risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment; the evidence shows harassment, discrimination and isolated criminal acts but no nexus to a Convention ground and credibility issues undermine the claim; internal resumption of life was reasonable, therefore the claims must be rejected.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection under IRPA.

Orders

  • Claimants' claims for refugee protection dismissed; not Convention refugees under section 96 IRPA and not persons in need of protection within the meaning of section 97(1)(a) or (b) IRPA.