VA8-04950

VA8-04950

Although the claimant's core allegations were accepted as credible, on a balance of probabilities the risk he faced was localized and primarily intended to intimidate him to stop a community project; post-war change in Sri Lanka and reliable evidence of relative safety in Muslim-majority areas in Eastern Province mean internal relocation is reasonable and effective; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution nor a balance of probabilities risk of other particularized harm and protection under ss.96 or 97 of the Act is not warranted.

Citation
VA8-04950
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Dependent Claimant (spouse): XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Dependent Claimant (minor Daughter): XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Decision (oral 20 June 2011; Written 15 July 2011)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; refugee protection denied for the claimant, spouse and dependent minor
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Internal Flight/relocation Alternative, Change of Country Conditions, Imputed Political Opinion, Religion, Credibility, Arrest and Detention, Threats and Criminality
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Internal Flight/relocation Alternative Change of Country Conditions Imputed Political Opinion +4 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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dependent Claimant (spouse)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Dependent Claimant (minor Daughter)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Decision (oral 20 June 2011; Written 15 July 2011)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97 of the Act
  3. 3 Whether internal relocation to Muslim-majority areas in Eastern Province is reasonable and avoids a risk of persecution

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimant's core allegations were accepted as credible, on a balance of probabilities the risk he faced was localized and primarily intended to intimidate him to stop a community project; post-war change in Sri Lanka and reliable evidence of relative safety in Muslim-majority areas in Eastern Province mean internal relocation is reasonable and effective; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution nor a balance of probabilities risk of other particularized harm and protection under ss.96 or 97 of the Act is not warranted.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; refugee protection denied for the claimant, spouse and dependent minor

Orders

  • Claim under ss.96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act denied; matter concluded