TA1-08064

TA1-08064

The panel refused the claim because the evidence was insufficient and not credible to establish an objective basis for persecution or a real risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment on return; alleged incidents were isolated, remote, uncorroborated or embellished, and documentary country evidence indicated Christians may practice openly, therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TA1-08064
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXX; Spouse/dependent: XXXXXXXXXXX; Child/dependent: XXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXXXXXX); Child/dependent: XXXXXXXXX; Refugee Protection Officer: K. Rine; Designated Representative: XXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Religion, Women Refugees, Gender, Particular Social Group, Gender Related Persecution, Credibility, Discrimination, Person in Need of Protection, Risk of Torture, Syria
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Human Rights Administrative Law Religion Women Refugees Gender Particular Social Group +6 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 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXX

Spouse/dependent

XXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXXXXXX)

Child/dependent

XXXXXXXXX

Child/dependent

K. Rine

Refugee Protection Officer

XXXXXXXXXXX

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of religion
  2. 2 Whether alleged discrimination amounts to persecution
  3. 3 Credibility and reliability of claimant's testimony and narratives

Ratio Decidendi

The panel refused the claim because the evidence was insufficient and not credible to establish an objective basis for persecution or a real risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment on return; alleged incidents were isolated, remote, uncorroborated or embellished, and documentary country evidence indicated Christians may practice openly, therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Claims for refugee protection dismissed