TA6-08545

TA6-08545

The claimant's testimony is not credible due to significant omissions, inconsistencies, poor demeanour and implausible religious knowledge; therefore he failed to establish he was wanted by the Public Security Bureau or that he faces a serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture/cruel treatment in China, and his claim is rejected.

Citation
TA6-08545
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Decision Maker: Diane L. Tinker; Refugee Protection Officer: M. Sack; Counsel for the Minister: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 August 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (immigration) / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Credibility Assessment, Freedom of Religion, Risk of Torture/cruel Treatment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Credibility Assessment Freedom of Religion Risk of Torture/cruel Treatment

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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Diane L. Tinker

Decision Maker

M. Sack

Refugee Protection Officer

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (immigration) / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection (risk to life, torture or cruel and unusual treatment)
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is a member of an underground Roman Catholic church

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's testimony is not credible due to significant omissions, inconsistencies, poor demeanour and implausible religious knowledge; therefore he failed to establish he was wanted by the Public Security Bureau or that he faces a serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture/cruel treatment in China, and his claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimant's claim