TA5-16012

TA5-16012

The panel found the claimant wholly not credible on core material aspects due to pervasive inconsistencies, contradictions, implausibilities and absence of corroboration, and gave no probative weight to documentary evidence it considered potentially fraudulent; accordingly the claimant and the minor are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA and the minor's claim, being derivative, also fails.

Citation
TA5-16012
Parties
Claimant (principal): XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimant (daughter): XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent (refugee Protection Officer): Refugee Protection Officer; Respondent (minister): Minister's Counsel
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Decision Following Merits Hearing
Outcome
Claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Persecution, Membership of a Particular Social Group, Race, Nationality, Perceived Political Opinion, Risk of Torture (s.97 Irpa), Corroboration and Documentary Evidence
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Persecution Membership of a Particular Social Group Race +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant (principal)

XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Claimant (daughter)

Refugee Protection Officer

Respondent (refugee Protection Officer)

Minister's Counsel

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Decision Following Merits Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is credible on core material facts
  2. 2 Whether claimant resided in the alleged Sri Lankan locality and had the asserted family/business profile
  3. 3 Whether the alleged harm is linked to Convention grounds

Ratio Decidendi

The panel found the claimant wholly not credible on core material aspects due to pervasive inconsistencies, contradictions, implausibilities and absence of corroboration, and gave no probative weight to documentary evidence it considered potentially fraudulent; accordingly the claimant and the minor are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA and the minor's claim, being derivative, also fails.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims of XXXXX XXXXX and XXXXX XXXXX are rejected
  • No protection granted under section 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act