TB1-01090

TB1-01090

Claimants failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary with clear and convincing evidence, did not take all reasonable steps to seek domestic protection, and their testimony lacked credibility and corroboration; on that basis the Panel found Hungary reasonably capable and willing to protect and dismissed the refugee protection claims under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TB1-01090
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXX; Spouse: XXXXX XXXX XX; Child: XXXXXX XXXX; Child: XXXXXXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Refugee Protection Division rejects the refugee protection claims; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Country Conditions, Credibility Assessment, Gender Related Persecution, Police Misconduct, Roma Discrimination, Motion to Disjoin
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Human Rights Administrative Law Gender Law State Protection Country Conditions Credibility Assessment +4 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXX XX

Spouse

XXXXXX XXXX

Child

XXXXXXXX XXXX

Child

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary
  2. 2 Whether claimants took all reasonable steps to seek domestic protection
  3. 3 Credibility of the claimants' testimony and corroboration

Ratio Decidendi

Claimants failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary with clear and convincing evidence, did not take all reasonable steps to seek domestic protection, and their testimony lacked credibility and corroboration; on that basis the Panel found Hungary reasonably capable and willing to protect and dismissed the refugee protection claims under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects the refugee protection claims; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the refugee protection claims of the named claimants