TB2-02406

TB2-02406

Because Saint Lucia is a functioning democratic state with statutory and institutional measures addressing domestic violence and the claimant failed to take reasonable steps to seek or exhaust state protection (e.g. higher police authority, court orders, NGOs), she did not rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence; therefore removal would not subject her personally to the risks alleged.

Citation
TB2-02406
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa) / Decision (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 of IRPA.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Particular Social Group, Domestic Violence, Burden of Proof, Credibility
Source Language
English
Refugee Protection Immigration Law Gender Based Persecution Human Rights State Protection Particular Social Group Domestic Violence Burden of Proof +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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether state protection is available and effective in Saint Lucia
  3. 3 Whether the claimant has rebutted the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Because Saint Lucia is a functioning democratic state with statutory and institutional measures addressing domestic violence and the claimant failed to take reasonable steps to seek or exhaust state protection (e.g. higher police authority, court orders, NGOs), she did not rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence; therefore removal would not subject her personally to the risks alleged.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 of IRPA.