TB6-06359

TB6-06359

The claims were rejected because the claimants failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, the identity of the persecutors or a nexus to a Convention ground and failed to establish an individualized forward-looking risk; credibility was adversely affected by material inconsistencies and failure to seek protection in the US, and objective evidence indicates a generalized crime risk rather than targeted persecution, so no protection under ss.96 or 97(1) IRPA is warranted.

Citation
TB6-06359
Parties
Male Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Female Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Male Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Female Claimant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Re Examination Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Definition, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Nexus to Convention Ground, Risk Assessment Under S.97(1), Gender Based Persecution, Kidnapping, Safe Third Country Agreement
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Definition Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Nexus to Convention Ground Risk Assessment Under S.97(1) +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 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Male Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Female Claimant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Male Claimant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Female Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Re Examination Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants established identity of agents of persecution
  2. 2 Whether there is nexus to a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether claimants face a forward-looking risk of persecution under s.96 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The claims were rejected because the claimants failed to prove, on a balance of probabilities, the identity of the persecutors or a nexus to a Convention ground and failed to establish an individualized forward-looking risk; credibility was adversely affected by material inconsistencies and failure to seek protection in the US, and objective evidence indicates a generalized crime risk rather than targeted persecution, so no protection under ss.96 or 97(1) IRPA is warranted.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • All claims are rejected
  • Male claimant, female claimant and minor male claimant: no protection in Canada; removal to Haiti as applicable