MA7-01227

MA7-01227

The Tribunal found that claimants have access to Portuguese citizenship by mere formality and that Portugal's lack of specialized educational institutions for the disabled daughter, while regrettable, does not rise to the level of persecution or a risk under ss.96-97 IRPA; therefore the family’s claims with respect to Portugal fail and the claims are rejected.

Citation
MA7-01227
Parties
Principal Claimant: Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Spouse: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Child: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX; Child: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Member, Refugee Protection Division (panel): Me Michelle Langelier; Claimant's Counsel: Me Diana S. Willard; Tribunal Officer: Isabelle Bourgeau; Minister's Counsel: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision Following Hearing (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Definition, Well Founded Fear of Persecution, State Protection, Alternative Citizenship, Rights of Disabled Persons, Access to Education
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Citizenship Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Definition Well Founded Fear of Persecution State Protection Alternative Citizenship +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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Spouse

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX

Child

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Child

Me Michelle Langelier

Member, Refugee Protection Division (panel)

Me Diana S. Willard

Claimant's Counsel

Isabelle Bourgeau

Tribunal Officer

N/A

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants have access to Portuguese citizenship as a viable alternative place of residence
  2. 2 Whether lack of specialized educational services in Portugal for a disabled child constitutes persecution under the Convention or risk under s.97 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether inability of a country to provide adequate educational care falls within the protection scheme of IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that claimants have access to Portuguese citizenship by mere formality and that Portugal's lack of specialized educational institutions for the disabled daughter, while regrettable, does not rise to the level of persecution or a risk under ss.96-97 IRPA; therefore the family’s claims with respect to Portugal fail and the claims are rejected.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • The claims of Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXX and XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX are rejected.
  • The Tribunal declines to analyze the claims against Venezuela given the finding regarding Portugal; claimants are not found to be Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.