MA9-04522

MA9-04522

The panel rejected the claimants' refugee protection claim because the female claimant's testimony was found not credible—marked by implausibilities, inconsistencies and a failure to produce key corroborating documentation (the complaint) or to report threats to her employer—so the claimants failed to meet their burden to show a real risk of persecution or serious harm under ss.96 or 97 IRPA.

Citation
MA9-04522
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 & 97) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claimants' refugee protection claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility, Corroboration and Documentary Production, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Threats From Criminal Organizations, Burden of Proof, Disclosure/production of Documents
Source Language
English
Refugee Protection Immigration Law Administrative Law Criminal Organization Violence Credibility Corroboration and Documentary Production Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 & 97) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants meet definition of Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of the female claimant's testimony

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claimants' refugee protection claim because the female claimant's testimony was found not credible—marked by implausibilities, inconsistencies and a failure to produce key corroborating documentation (the complaint) or to report threats to her employer—so the claimants failed to meet their burden to show a real risk of persecution or serious harm under ss.96 or 97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claimants' refugee protection claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim of XXXX XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXXX and XXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX is rejected by the panel (decision dated December 16, 2010).