TA6-12837

TA6-12837

The Tribunal found the documentary record and evidence showed that in Mexico City federal and local institutions made serious efforts to provide adequate protection (PGR, SIAC, Internal Affairs, CDHDF), the claimant had potential recourse to the rule of law, and therefore did not establish a serious possibility of persecution or a balance‑of‑probabilities risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment; the refugee claims were rejected under ss.96 and 97 IRPA.

Citation
TA6-12837
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Spouse: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Dependent Child: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Decision (hearing Concluded)
Outcome
Refugee protection claims dismissed (refused)
Legal Topics
State Protection, Corruption, Persecution, Risk Assessment, Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Protection Administrative Law Human Rights State Protection Corruption Persecution Risk Assessment +1 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Spouse

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Dependent Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (refugee Protection Division) / Decision (hearing Concluded)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant has a well‑founded fear of persecution
  2. 2 Whether Mexican authorities provided adequate state protection in Mexico City
  3. 3 Whether threats and conduct by corrupt officials constitute persecution

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found the documentary record and evidence showed that in Mexico City federal and local institutions made serious efforts to provide adequate protection (PGR, SIAC, Internal Affairs, CDHDF), the claimant had potential recourse to the rule of law, and therefore did not establish a serious possibility of persecution or a balance‑of‑probabilities risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment; the refugee claims were rejected under ss.96 and 97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claims dismissed (refused)

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims dismissed
  • Decision issued October 24, 2007