TB2-11067

TB2-11067

The panel concluded the claimants failed to establish nexus to a Convention ground because their fear stems from ordinary criminality (extortion by mafia) rather than persecution for a protected ground; the risk identified is generalized criminal risk under s.97(1)(b)(ii), and the minor's mental health evidence does not link his condition to persecution or inadequate care in Hungary — therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB2-11067
Parties
Principal Claimant (applicant; Designated Representative for Minors): XXXX XXXX; Spouse (female Claimant): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant (son): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Decision Following RPD Hearing (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Refugee protection claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Definition, Particular Social Group, Persons in Need of Protection, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Generalized Vs. Personalized Risk, Medical Evidence and Mental Health Impact, Section 97(1)(b)(ii) Generalized Risk Exception
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Definition Particular Social Group Persons in Need of Protection Nexus to Convention Grounds Generalized Vs. Personalized Risk +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 5 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant (applicant; Designated Representative for Minors)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse (female Claimant)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant (son)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Decision Following RPD Hearing (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants have nexus to a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether claimants form a particular social group
  3. 3 Whether risk faced is personalized or generalized under s.97(1)(b)(ii)

Ratio Decidendi

The panel concluded the claimants failed to establish nexus to a Convention ground because their fear stems from ordinary criminality (extortion by mafia) rather than persecution for a protected ground; the risk identified is generalized criminal risk under s.97(1)(b)(ii), and the minor's mental health evidence does not link his condition to persecution or inadequate care in Hungary — therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims of the four claimants are rejected by the RPD
  • Claimants are not persons in need of protection and may be removed to Hungary