TB8-11188

TB8-11188

The appeal was dismissed because the appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection: Hungary is a functioning democracy with operational security forces, the appellants did not provide clear and convincing evidence of systemic or effective denial of protection (including failing to report assaults and offering no compelling explanation), and they provided no evidence of a personalized risk requiring a separate s.97 analysis; therefore the RAD confirmed the RPD's decision that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB8-11188
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Co Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (appeal Heard, No New Evidence, No Oral Hearing)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Persecution, Roma Discrimination, Credibility, Section 97 Risk, Country Conditions, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law State Protection Persecution Roma Discrimination Credibility +3 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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Co Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad Review of RPD Decision) / Decision (appeal Heard, No New Evidence, No Oral Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants rebutted the presumption of state protection
  2. 2 Whether the RPD erred in its state protection analysis
  3. 3 Whether the appellants suffered persecution on account of Roma ethnicity

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was dismissed because the appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection: Hungary is a functioning democracy with operational security forces, the appellants did not provide clear and convincing evidence of systemic or effective denial of protection (including failing to report assaults and offering no compelling explanation), and they provided no evidence of a personalized risk requiring a separate s.97 analysis; therefore the RAD confirmed the RPD's decision that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RAD confirms RPD determination that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the RAD confirms the determination of the RPD that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
  • The appeal is dismissed.