TA9-09398

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption that the Slovak Republic can provide adequate state protection; documentary evidence showed the state is making serious efforts and the claimants did not take all reasonable steps to seek protection, therefore they are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Citation: TA9-09398
Parties: Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXX
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 11 May 2012
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection (irpa S.96 and S.97) / Decision (reasons and Decision, May 11, 2012)
Outcome: Refugee Protection Division rejects claims; claimants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics: State Protection, Racial Discrimination, Roma, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Country of Origin Information, Credibility
Source Language: English

Refugee Law Immigration Human Rights Administrative Law State Protection Racial Discrimination Roma Convention Refugee +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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa S.96 and S.97) / Decision (reasons and Decision, May 11, 2012)

Legal Issues

1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA
2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
3 Whether adequate state protection is available in Slovakia

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects claims; claimants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.