TB0-11528

TB0-11528

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary with clear and convincing evidence; Hungary is a functioning democracy with available remedies and institutions and the claimants did not exhaust or demonstrate the inadequacy of those remedies; therefore there is not a serious possibility of persecution nor a balance of probabilities risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment, and the claims are rejected.

Citation
TB0-11528
Parties
Claimant (roma): XXXXXXXXXXXX; Female Claimant (jewish; Common Law Partner): XXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96 or 97(1) of the IRPA.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Convention Refugee Status, Persecution, Discrimination (ethnic/religious), Country Conditions, Burden of Proof, Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law State Protection Convention Refugee Status Persecution Discrimination (ethnic/religious) +3 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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant (roma)

XXXXXXXX

Female Claimant (jewish; Common Law Partner)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary
  2. 2 Whether the claimants face a serious possibility of persecution for a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether claimants face risk to life, danger of torture, or cruel and unusual treatment

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary with clear and convincing evidence; Hungary is a functioning democracy with available remedies and institutions and the claimants did not exhaust or demonstrate the inadequacy of those remedies; therefore there is not a serious possibility of persecution nor a balance of probabilities risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment, and the claims are rejected.

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96 or 97(1) of the IRPA.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimants' refugee protection claims