MA7-04911

MA7-04911

The claimants' refugee protection claims are rejected because material contradictions between written and oral statements and the failure to provide or seek corroborating documents (including confirmation from the alleged lawyer) undermine their credibility, so they have not established they are refugees under s.96 or persons in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA.

Citation
MA7-04911
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant (spouse): XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant (minor Daughter): XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Oscar Fernando Rodas; Panel: Me Alain Bissonnette; Tribunal Officer: Normand Leduc; Minister's Counsel: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Protection Division) / Hearing and Decision (rpd Hearing August 1, 2008; Decision September 2, 2008)
Outcome
Claims for refugee protection rejected; claimants found not to be refugees under section 96 or persons in need of protection under section 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Legal Topics
Credibility, Corroboration and Documentary Evidence, Particular Social Group, Internal Relocation, Omissions in Personal Information Form
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Evidence Credibility Corroboration and Documentary Evidence Particular Social Group Internal Relocation Omissions in Personal Information Form

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 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant (spouse)

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant (minor Daughter)

Me Oscar Fernando Rodas

Claimant's Counsel

Me Alain Bissonnette

Panel

Normand Leduc

Tribunal Officer

N/A

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Protection Division) / Hearing and Decision (rpd Hearing August 1, 2008; Decision September 2, 2008)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are credible
  2. 2 Whether claimants provided corroborating documentary evidence required by Rule 7
  3. 3 Whether the claimants face a risk of persecution by reason of membership in a particular social group (Maras)

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' refugee protection claims are rejected because material contradictions between written and oral statements and the failure to provide or seek corroborating documents (including confirmation from the alleged lawyer) undermine their credibility, so they have not established they are refugees under s.96 or persons in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claims for refugee protection rejected; claimants found not to be refugees under section 96 or persons in need of protection under section 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims dismissed; no protection granted