TA9-09591

TA9-09591

The claimants' evidence contained material inconsistencies and credibility deficiencies, they failed to provide reliable corroboration and did not rebut the presumption of available state protection on the clear and convincing standard; documentary evidence shows state efforts and remedies for Roma in Hungary, therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Citation
TA9-09591
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXX; Common Law Partner / Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Hearing and Reasons and Decision (final)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility, State Protection, Persecution, Convention Refugee (s.96 Irpa), Persons in Need of Protection (s.97 Irpa), Interpretation and Translation
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Credibility State Protection Persecution Convention Refugee (s.96 Irpa) +2 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Common Law Partner / Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Hearing and Reasons and Decision (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97 of IRPA
  3. 3 Whether claimants' evidence is credible

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' evidence contained material inconsistencies and credibility deficiencies, they failed to provide reliable corroboration and did not rebut the presumption of available state protection on the clear and convincing standard; documentary evidence shows state efforts and remedies for Roma in Hungary, therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Request to strike original Personal Information Forms and narrative denied
  • Designated Representative appointed for the minor claimant as per section 167(2) IRPA