TA9-17892

TA9-17892

Because the principal claimant was found not credible, re‑availed to Chinese authorities, failed to seek asylum in the USA, and objective country evidence shows fines rather than forced sterilization and limited persecution of Christians in Fujian, there is no well‑founded fear and no credible basis for the claims; therefore the claims are rejected under IRPA including s.107(2).

Citation
TA9-17892
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Oral Hearing; Decision Reserved; Decision Issued (november 5, 2012)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection; panel finds no credible basis for the claims pursuant to s.107(2) IRPA.
Legal Topics
One Child Policy, Freedom of Religion, Reavailment, Credibility Assessment, No Credible Basis (s.107(2) Irpa), Minor Claimant Status and Citizenship
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law One Child Policy Freedom of Religion Reavailment Credibility Assessment +2 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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Oral Hearing; Decision Reserved; Decision Issued (november 5, 2012)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Credibility of the principal claimant's testimony and documentary record

Ratio Decidendi

Because the principal claimant was found not credible, re‑availed to Chinese authorities, failed to seek asylum in the USA, and objective country evidence shows fines rather than forced sterilization and limited persecution of Christians in Fujian, there is no well‑founded fear and no credible basis for the claims; therefore the claims are rejected under IRPA including s.107(2).

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection; panel finds no credible basis for the claims pursuant to s.107(2) IRPA.

Orders

  • Claims dismissed
  • Panel states there is no credible basis for the claims pursuant to subsection 107(2) of IRPA