TB4-10651

TB4-10651

Objective biometric evidence from UK authorities established on the balance of probabilities that the principal claimant had previously been granted asylum and naturalized in the UK and that the minor was likely a UK citizen, this contradicted the claimants' submitted identity and material facts, the principal claimant knowingly provided false information to obtain status, the falsifications were material to the claim and rendered it clearly fraudulent under s.107.1 IRPA, and there is no serious possibility of persecution on return to Somalia; therefore the claims are rejected and manifestly unfounded.

Citation
TB4-10651
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX); Associate Claimant (minor): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent (minister): Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 February 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Hearing)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; claims found manifestly unfounded.
Legal Topics
Identity, Credibility, Manifestly Unfounded, Misrepresentation, Citizenship, Ministerial Intervention
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Identity Credibility Manifestly Unfounded Misrepresentation Citizenship +1 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 5 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX)

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Claimant (minor)

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the principal claimant's identity is as she claims or matches a UK asylum beneficiary
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are credible given contradictory objective biometric evidence
  3. 3 Whether the claims are ineligible due to prior status in the UK

Ratio Decidendi

Objective biometric evidence from UK authorities established on the balance of probabilities that the principal claimant had previously been granted asylum and naturalized in the UK and that the minor was likely a UK citizen, this contradicted the claimants' submitted identity and material facts, the principal claimant knowingly provided false information to obtain status, the falsifications were material to the claim and rendered it clearly fraudulent under s.107.1 IRPA, and there is no serious possibility of persecution on return to Somalia; therefore the claims are rejected and manifestly unfounded.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; claims found manifestly unfounded.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the refugee protection claims of the claimants
  • Panel finds the claims manifestly unfounded pursuant to s.107.1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act