MA8-00365

MA8-00365

The claim is rejected because the tribunal found the claimant not credible on key aspects, he failed to obtain or reasonably attempt to obtain corroborative complaint copies or to use available reporting mechanisms or supervisory channels, he did not rebut the presumption that Mexico can provide adequate protection on a balance of probabilities, and a reasonable internal flight alternative exists; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
MA8-00365
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Claude Brodeur; Panel: Me Michel Byczak; Designated Representative: Designated representative; Minister's Counsel: Minister's Counsel
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act Ss.96,97(1)) / Oral Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, Evidence and Corroboration, Procedure Document Time Limits
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law State Protection Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative Evidence and Corroboration Procedure Document Time Limits

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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Claude Brodeur

Claimant's Counsel

Me Michel Byczak

Panel

Designated representative

Designated Representative

Minister's Counsel

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act Ss.96,97(1)) / Oral Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's testimony is credible
  2. 2 Whether effective state protection in Mexico was available and the claimant exhausted or reasonably refrained from exhausting domestic remedies
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative in Mexico exists and is reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is rejected because the tribunal found the claimant not credible on key aspects, he failed to obtain or reasonably attempt to obtain corroborative complaint copies or to use available reporting mechanisms or supervisory channels, he did not rebut the presumption that Mexico can provide adequate protection on a balance of probabilities, and a reasonable internal flight alternative exists; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee claim dismissed