TA9-08424

TA9-08424

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption that the Czech Republic can provide adequate state protection on a balance of probabilities with clear and convincing evidence; the principal claimant did not seek or exhaust available remedies for many incidents and documentary evidence shows the state is taking concrete measures to protect Roma, therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TA9-08424
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Co Claimant: XXXX XXXX XX; Minor Claimant: XXXXXX XXXX X; Minor Claimant: XXXXXXX XXXX XX; Minor Claimant: XXXXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing De Novo and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of the principal claimant, the co-claimant and the minor claimants; none qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Persecution, Discrimination (roma), Convention Refugee Determination, Credibility and Failure to Seek State Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law State Protection Persecution Discrimination (roma) Convention Refugee Determination +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XX

Co Claimant

XXXXXX XXXX X

Minor Claimant

XXXXXXX XXXX XX

Minor Claimant

XXXXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing De Novo and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether adequate state protection is available in the Czech Republic for Roma claimants
  3. 3 Whether claimants exhausted domestic remedies or rebutted presumption of state protection

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption that the Czech Republic can provide adequate state protection on a balance of probabilities with clear and convincing evidence; the principal claimant did not seek or exhaust available remedies for many incidents and documentary evidence shows the state is taking concrete measures to protect Roma, therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of the principal claimant, the co-claimant and the minor claimants; none qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • The Refugee Protection Division rejects the principal claimant's claim.
  • The Refugee Protection Division rejects the co-claimant's claim.