TA5-10362

TA5-10362

The claims are rejected because the principal claimant failed to discharge the onus of providing credible and trustworthy evidence on material aspects of her claim (admitted lying, multiple contradictions and implausibilities), and therefore did not establish on the balance of probabilities that she suffered discrimination amounting to persecution or that she was treated as a chattel; the dependent child's claim is derivative and fails accordingly.

Citation
TA5-10362
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Dependent Claimant (minor Daughter): XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX); Refugee Protection Officer: J. Baptiste; Designated Representative: XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 August 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (final)
Outcome
Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Ethnic Discrimination, Persecution, Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection, Gender Based Persecution, Domestic Violence Treated as Persecution, Credibility and Evidence, Misrepresentation/lying to Immigration Officer, Withdrawal of Counsel
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Human Rights Family Law/domestic Violence Ethnic Discrimination Persecution Convention Refugee Status Person in Need of Protection Gender Based Persecution +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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX)

Dependent Claimant (minor Daughter)

J. Baptiste

Refugee Protection Officer

XXXXX XXXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant established a well‑founded fear of persecution under ss.96-97 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether discrimination faced by the claimant amounted to persecution
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was treated as a chattel/domestic violence ground for refugee protection

Ratio Decidendi

The claims are rejected because the principal claimant failed to discharge the onus of providing credible and trustworthy evidence on material aspects of her claim (admitted lying, multiple contradictions and implausibilities), and therefore did not establish on the balance of probabilities that she suffered discrimination amounting to persecution or that she was treated as a chattel; the dependent child's claim is derivative and fails accordingly.

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee claims of XXXXX XXXXX and XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX are rejected.