TB4-12663

TB4-12663

Claimants were found to lack requisite subjective fear and were not credible because of long delays, failure to claim asylum in the UK/Europe when opportunities existed, continued residence and successful careers in Pakistan and international travel; therefore they did not establish a serious possibility of persecution under s.96 nor did they establish on the balance of probabilities a risk under s.97(1).

Citation
TB4-12663
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claims rejected; not Convention refugees and not at risk under section 97(1) of the IRPA
Legal Topics
Persecution, Religious Discrimination, Credibility, Risk of Torture, Non Refoulement, State Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Persecution Religious Discrimination Credibility Risk of Torture +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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

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

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimants face a risk of torture, risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment or punishment under section 97(1) of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimants have requisite subjective fear and are credible

Ratio Decidendi

Claimants were found to lack requisite subjective fear and were not credible because of long delays, failure to claim asylum in the UK/Europe when opportunities existed, continued residence and successful careers in Pakistan and international travel; therefore they did not establish a serious possibility of persecution under s.96 nor did they establish on the balance of probabilities a risk under s.97(1).

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; not Convention refugees and not at risk under section 97(1) of the IRPA

Orders

  • Claims for refugee protection dismissed pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (decision dated February 10, 2017)