VB1-00615

VB1-00615

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of Colombian state protection because they made only one police complaint and did not follow up or pursue other available state remedies despite evidence that Colombian authorities had capacity and had undertaken serious efforts against FARC; therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
VB1-00615
Parties
Principal Claimant (wife): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associated Claimant (husband): XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant (child): XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant (child): XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant (child): XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (reasons) Dated November 15, 2012
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Convention Refugee Determination, Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law International Protection State Protection Exhaustion of Local Remedies Convention Refugee Determination Credibility

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 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant (wife)

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associated Claimant (husband)

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant (child)

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant (child)

XXXX XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant (child)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (reasons) Dated November 15, 2012

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether claimants rebutted the presumption that the Colombian state could protect them
  3. 3 Whether claimants exhausted available domestic remedies and reported threats to appropriate authorities

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of Colombian state protection because they made only one police complaint and did not follow up or pursue other available state remedies despite evidence that Colombian authorities had capacity and had undertaken serious efforts against FARC; therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims of the five claimants are dismissed.