TB0-16656

The claimants failed to provide clear and convincing evidence that Hungary is unable or unwilling to protect them and did not take reasonable steps to seek available protection, so the presumption of state protection stands and their claims under sections 96 and 97 fail.

Citation: TB0-16656
Parties: Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX; Common Law Spouse: XXXXXXXX XXXX; Minor Daughter: XXXX XXXX; Minor Son: XXXX XXXX
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 3 August 2012
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Claim (irpa) / Decision (reasons and Decision Issued)
Outcome: Refugee claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 or 97 of the IRPA
Legal Topics: State Protection, Convention Refugee, Credibility, Roma Discrimination, Section 97(1) Risk, Country Conditions
Source Language: English

Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law State Protection Convention Refugee Credibility Roma Discrimination Section 97(1) Risk +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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXXXX XXXX

Common Law Spouse

XXXX XXXX

Minor Daughter

XXXX XXXX

Minor Son

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa) / Decision (reasons and Decision Issued)

Legal Issues

1 Whether claimants rebutted presumption of state protection
2 Credibility and consistency of claimant narratives
3 Whether claimant exhausted or reasonably sought domestic protection

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Refugee claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 or 97 of the IRPA

Orders

Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of all four claimants