TB5-03239

TB5-03239

Mr. XXXX is a Convention refugee because his work as a lawyer engaged the state machinery, exposed him to a real risk of persecution linked to a Convention ground, and effective state protection was unlikely; Ms. XXXX and the minor lack a sufficient personal nexus or objective risk profile absent Mr. XXXX and therefore do not meet the Convention refugee or person-in-need-of-protection thresholds.

Citation
TB5-03239
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX); Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision at the Refugee Protection Division (final Determination)
Outcome
Claim of XXXX XXXX XXXX allowed; claims of XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX denied
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Well Founded Fear, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Convention Refugee Determination Well Founded Fear State Protection Credibility Assessment Country Conditions

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)

Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision at the Refugee Protection Division (final Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Mr. XXXX is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether Ms. XXXX and the minor claimant are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether there is a nexus between the threats and a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

Mr. XXXX is a Convention refugee because his work as a lawyer engaged the state machinery, exposed him to a real risk of persecution linked to a Convention ground, and effective state protection was unlikely; Ms. XXXX and the minor lack a sufficient personal nexus or objective risk profile absent Mr. XXXX and therefore do not meet the Convention refugee or person-in-need-of-protection thresholds.

Court Disposition

Claim of XXXX XXXX XXXX allowed; claims of XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX denied

Orders

  • Grant refugee protection to XXXX XXXX XXXX (declared a Convention refugee)
  • Deny refugee protection and protection claims of XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX (not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection)