MA8-16074

MA8-16074

The claimant failed to establish a nexus to a Convention ground and did not prove a personalized risk greater than that faced by the general population; his fear of extortion and generalized gang violence is insufficient for recognition as a Convention refugee under s.96 or as a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(b).

Citation
MA8-16074
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Oscar Fernando Rodas; Tribunal Officer: Catherine Brisebois; Panel Member: Roxane Cyr; Designated Representative: N/A; Minister's Counsel: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant not recognized as a Convention refugee under s.96 nor as a person in need of protection under s.97(1) of the IRPA
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Personalized Risk, Generalized Risk, Extortion, Gang Violence, Nexus to Convention Grounds
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law International Human Rights Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Personalized Risk Generalized Risk Extortion +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Oscar Fernando Rodas

Claimant's Counsel

Catherine Brisebois

Tribunal Officer

Roxane Cyr

Panel Member

N/A

Designated Representative

N/A

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant faces persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership in a particular social group (s.96)
  2. 2 Whether claimant is at risk of torture, risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment for which state protection is unavailable (s.97(1)(b))
  3. 3 Whether the risk is personalized and greater than that of the general population

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to establish a nexus to a Convention ground and did not prove a personalized risk greater than that faced by the general population; his fear of extortion and generalized gang violence is insufficient for recognition as a Convention refugee under s.96 or as a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(b).

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant not recognized as a Convention refugee under s.96 nor as a person in need of protection under s.97(1) of the IRPA

Orders

  • Claim for refugee protection rejected
  • No recognition as a Convention refugee under section 96 of the IRPA