MA8-12290

MA8-12290

The panel rejected the claims because two serious omissions going to the heart of the claim and persistent inability to provide dates rendered the principal claimant not credible; because credibility was not established the claimants failed to discharge the burden under s.96 and s.97(1) IRPA and protection issues (state protection/IFA) were not addressed.

Citation
MA8-12290
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant Minor: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant Minor: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Designated Representative: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Refugee protection claims rejected
Legal Topics
Credibility, Persecution, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Omissions, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Credibility Persecution State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Omissions Burden of Proof

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant Minor

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant Minor

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether the principal claimant is credible given omissions and inability to recall dates
  3. 3 Whether the claimants met the burden under s.96 and s.97(1) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claims because two serious omissions going to the heart of the claim and persistent inability to provide dates rendered the principal claimant not credible; because credibility was not established the claimants failed to discharge the burden under s.96 and s.97(1) IRPA and protection issues (state protection/IFA) were not addressed.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claims rejected

Orders

  • The refugee protection claims filed by the principal claimant and her children are rejected