TB2-00403

TB2-00403

The claimant's allegations were found not credible on a balance of probabilities, documentary and country evidence indicate fines and administrative penalties (and forgiveness for children born abroad) are the likely response rather than forced abortion or sterilization, and the claimant failed to prove an individualized, more-likely-than-not risk of persecution or torture; therefore the refugee and protection claims fail.

Citation
TB2-00403
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minister: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 November 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96,97) / Final Decision / Reasons
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
One Child Policy, Forced Sterilization, Forced Abortion, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions, Convention Refugee Determination, Non Refoulement
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights One Child Policy Forced Sterilization Forced Abortion Credibility Assessment +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 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)

Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96,97) / Final Decision / Reasons

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant faces a risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's allegations of forced abortion and sterilization are credible

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's allegations were found not credible on a balance of probabilities, documentary and country evidence indicate fines and administrative penalties (and forgiveness for children born abroad) are the likely response rather than forced abortion or sterilization, and the claimant failed to prove an individualized, more-likely-than-not risk of persecution or torture; therefore the refugee and protection claims fail.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimant's claim (negative decision dated November 26, 2013)