TB0-06121

TB0-06121

The claimant did not establish nexus to a Convention ground and, although he faced threats and extortion by MS, the risk was a widespread, generalized gang risk in El Salvador; therefore the claim fails under section 96 and section 97(1)(b)(ii) of the IRPA.

Citation
TB0-06121
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Spouse: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Sections 96 and 97(1)) / Hearing and Decision (rpd Oral June 14, 2011; Written Reasons June 16, 2011)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Nexus to Convention Grounds, Generalized Risk Under S.97(1)(b)(ii), Extortion by Gangs, Convention Refugee Definition, Person in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Criminal Law (gang Violence) Nexus to Convention Grounds Generalized Risk Under S.97(1)(b)(ii) Extortion by Gangs Convention Refugee Definition +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 4 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Spouse

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Sections 96 and 97(1)) / Hearing and Decision (rpd Oral June 14, 2011; Written Reasons June 16, 2011)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant established nexus to a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether the claimant faces a personalized risk amounting to persecution
  3. 3 Whether the risk is 'general' under section 97(1)(b)(ii) of the IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant did not establish nexus to a Convention ground and, although he faced threats and extortion by MS, the risk was a widespread, generalized gang risk in El Salvador; therefore the claim fails under section 96 and section 97(1)(b)(ii) of the IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects claimants' claims; claimants not found to be Convention refugees or persons in need of protection