TB2-11561

TB2-11561

The claim was rejected because the panel found the claimant not credible due to multiple material contradictions between her PIF and oral testimony and within her testimony, supported by contradictory evidence from her father; because credibility failed, the panel did not need to and did not assess state protection or internal flight alternative, and concluded the claimant did not meet the test under Sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA.

Citation
TB2-11561
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Panel Chair: Me Stephane Hebert
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 April 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based/sexual Violence, Extortion by Non State Actors
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Credibility Assessment State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based/sexual Violence Extortion by Non State Actors

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Me Stephane Hebert

Panel Chair

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Credibility of claimant's allegations
  2. 2 Availability of state protection in Sri Lanka
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative exists

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was rejected because the panel found the claimant not credible due to multiple material contradictions between her PIF and oral testimony and within her testimony, supported by contradictory evidence from her father; because credibility failed, the panel did not need to and did not assess state protection or internal flight alternative, and concluded the claimant did not meet the test under Sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected

Orders

  • Claimant's refugee protection claim is rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under Sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.