TA8-11845

TA8-11845

The claimants failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that the Czech Republic was unable or unwilling to protect them; police investigated reported incidents, the state is not in breakdown and has measures (RPA, MLO, anti-extremism strategy) to address hate crimes, therefore there is not a serious possibility of persecution or risk upon return and the claims are rejected.

Citation
TA8-11845
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Spouse / Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Child: XXXXXX XXXXX; Child: XXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 and 97(1)) / Board Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
All claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Persecution, Ethnic Persecution, Discrimination, Convention Refugee Status, Risk Assessment
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law State Protection Persecution Ethnic Persecution Discrimination +2 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse / Designated Representative

XXXXXX XXXXX

Child

XXXX XXXXX

Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 and 97(1)) / Board Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Czech Republic provides state protection to Roma claimants
  2. 2 Whether the claimants rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that the Czech Republic was unable or unwilling to protect them; police investigated reported incidents, the state is not in breakdown and has measures (RPA, MLO, anti-extremism strategy) to address hate crimes, therefore there is not a serious possibility of persecution or risk upon return and the claims are rejected.

Court Disposition

All claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • All claims are rejected