TA8-16141

TA8-16141

The principal claimant failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in St. Vincent with clear and convincing evidence and did not exhaust or insist upon available police protection; documentary evidence shows functioning state institutions and active policing, therefore protection would be reasonably forthcoming and the claims fail.

Citation
TA8-16141
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Claims dismissed; principal claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection; minor claimant's claim also rejected.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Convention Refugee Determination, Credibility, Witness Protection, Police Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law State Protection Convention Refugee Determination Credibility Witness Protection Police Protection

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

Parties

XXXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants qualify as Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection was available in St. Vincent and the Grenadines

Ratio Decidendi

The principal claimant failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in St. Vincent with clear and convincing evidence and did not exhaust or insist upon available police protection; documentary evidence shows functioning state institutions and active policing, therefore protection would be reasonably forthcoming and the claims fail.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed; principal claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection; minor claimant's claim also rejected.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of the principal claimant and the minor claimant.