MA5-06326

MA5-06326

The panel found the claimants not credible due to material omissions at the port of entry, multiple inconsistencies and implausibilities in testimony, and documentary evidence that would likely have recorded the alleged arrest but did not; therefore the claimants failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or a personal risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment and the claims were dismissed.

Citation
MA5-06326
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Stéphanie Valois
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Decision Following Hearing (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Persecution, Credibility, Refugee Protection, Risk of Torture, Family Persecution, Omissions at Port of Entry, Documentary Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Persecution Credibility Refugee Protection Risk of Torture Family Persecution +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Stéphanie Valois

Claimant's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Decision Following Hearing (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are credible
  2. 2 Whether the father was arrested and the family targeted by ANS
  3. 3 Whether a serious possibility of persecution exists on a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The panel found the claimants not credible due to material omissions at the port of entry, multiple inconsistencies and implausibilities in testimony, and documentary evidence that would likely have recorded the alleged arrest but did not; therefore the claimants failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or a personal risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment and the claims were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims of XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX and XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX dismissed
  • No protection granted under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act