MA9-13508

MA9-13508

Claimant's testimony contained material inconsistencies, omissions and implausibilities and documentary evidence was not probative; on balance of probabilities claimant failed to establish credible nexus to persecution or a real risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment, therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under IRPA.

Citation
MA9-13508
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Annie Bélanger; Adjudicator: Anna Brychcy; Tribunal Officer: Isabelle Bourgeau; Minister's Counsel: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing Decision (decision Issued)
Outcome
Claim rejected (not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection)
Legal Topics
Credibility, Convention Refugee (s.96 Irpa), Person in Need of Protection (s.97(1) Irpa), Political Opinion, Torture, Removal/deportation Safeguards, Refugee Sur Place, Documentary Evidence, Interpreter Issues
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Credibility Convention Refugee (s.96 Irpa) Person in Need of Protection (s.97(1) Irpa) Political Opinion Torture +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 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Annie Bélanger

Claimant's Counsel

Anna Brychcy

Adjudicator

Isabelle Bourgeau

Tribunal Officer

N/A

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing Decision (decision Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility and consistency of claimant's account

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant's testimony contained material inconsistencies, omissions and implausibilities and documentary evidence was not probative; on balance of probabilities claimant failed to establish credible nexus to persecution or a real risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment, therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected (not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection)

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected