MA4-07115

MA4-07115

The panel rejected the claim because the claimant was not credible, failed to prove her asserted identity, religious conversion and whereabouts, and the key supporting documents were found to lack probative value or to be fraudulent; absent credible evidence of persecution or unavailable state protection, the claim cannot succeed under IRPA ss.96‑97.

Citation
MA4-07115
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Refugee Protection Officer: Gary Dukeshire; Decision Maker (member, Refugee Protection Division): Sajjad Randhawa
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not to be a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Gender Based Persecution, Credibility and Identity, Religious Conversion, State Protection, Documentary Evidence and Probative Value, Fraudulent Documents, Women Refugee Claims, Country Conditions (nigeria)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Gender Based Persecution Credibility and Identity Religious Conversion State Protection Documentary Evidence and Probative Value +3 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Gary Dukeshire

Refugee Protection Officer

Sajjad Randhawa

Decision Maker (member, Refugee Protection Division)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's identity and religious ethnicity were established
  2. 2 Whether the claimant was a credible witness
  3. 3 Whether the claimant established a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because the claimant was not credible, failed to prove her asserted identity, religious conversion and whereabouts, and the key supporting documents were found to lack probative value or to be fraudulent; absent credible evidence of persecution or unavailable state protection, the claim cannot succeed under IRPA ss.96‑97.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not to be a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee claim dismissed; claimant not recognized as a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under IRPA