TA5-08835

TA5-08835

The claimants were victims of generalized criminality without proven nexus to a Convention ground and failed to show, by clear and convincing evidence, that state protection was unavailable or ineffective; police action including rescue and arrest indicated protection was available, therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TA5-08835
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Spouse: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Child: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Sibling: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 January 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection / Decision
Outcome
Claims rejected
Legal Topics
State Protection, Kidnapping, Racially Motivated Violence, Convention Refugee Determination, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
English

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Spouse

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Child

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Sibling

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection / Decision

  1. 1 Whether the claimants qualify as Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether there is nexus between the harm suffered and a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether state protection was available and effective

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants were victims of generalized criminality without proven nexus to a Convention ground and failed to show, by clear and convincing evidence, that state protection was unavailable or ineffective; police action including rescue and arrest indicated protection was available, therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected

Orders

  • The refugee protection claims are rejected.