TA9-24058

TA9-24058

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption that Hungary can protect its citizens and did not take all reasonable steps to seek domestic protection; on the balance of probabilities state protection is available and therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TA9-24058
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Spouse: XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Child: XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Child: XXXXX XXXXX (Jr.)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Refused at Merits Decision by Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Ethnic Discrimination (roma), Persecution, Burden of Proof, Risk Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law State Protection Ethnic Discrimination (roma) Persecution Burden of Proof +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX

Spouse

XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Child

XXXXX XXXXX (Jr.)

Minor Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Refused at Merits Decision by Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether claimant faces a risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection exists in Hungary

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption that Hungary can protect its citizens and did not take all reasonable steps to seek domestic protection; on the balance of probabilities state protection is available and therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division decision refusing protection dated December 20, 2011
  • Claims of spouse and minor children dismissed as joined to principal claim