TB0-13144

TB0-13144

On the balance of probabilities the Panel found the claimants lacked credibility because of unexplained delay in seeking asylum in the United States, inconsistencies and implausibilities in the Ombudsman's report and other testimony, and failure to seek police protection; objective country evidence showed adequate state protection in Colombia, so claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence and the claims were rejected.

Citation
TB0-13144
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Co Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97(1)) / Hearing Concluded Decision Dated June 15, 2011
Outcome
Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Convention Refugee, Credibility, Country Conditions, Failure to Seek Protection in Safe Third Country, Negative Decision
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law International Protection Administrative Law State Protection Convention Refugee Credibility Country Conditions +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Co Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97(1)) / Hearing Concluded Decision Dated June 15, 2011

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether principal claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection is available in Colombia

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the Panel found the claimants lacked credibility because of unexplained delay in seeking asylum in the United States, inconsistencies and implausibilities in the Ombudsman's report and other testimony, and failure to seek police protection; objective country evidence showed adequate state protection in Colombia, so claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence and the claims were rejected.

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims (claims dismissed).