TA5-16017

TA5-16017

The panel found the claimants' account and explanations not credible, determined there is no clear and convincing evidence to displace the presumption of effective state protection in Tanzania, and concluded there is no reasonable chance of persecution or serious harm on return; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TA5-16017
Parties
Claimant (principal): XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant (brother): XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Refugee Protection Officer: P. Stolworthy; Designated Representative: Designated Representative; Minister's Counsel: Minister's Counsel
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (determination)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants found not to be Convention refugees and not to be persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, State Protection, Political Opinion, Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection State Protection Political Opinion Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant (principal)

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant (brother)

P. Stolworthy

Refugee Protection Officer

Designated Representative

Designated Representative

Minister's Counsel

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants qualify as Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection exists in Tanzania

Ratio Decidendi

The panel found the claimants' account and explanations not credible, determined there is no clear and convincing evidence to displace the presumption of effective state protection in Tanzania, and concluded there is no reasonable chance of persecution or serious harm on return; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants found not to be Convention refugees and not to be persons in need of protection.