TB1-09888

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption that Germany provides adequate state protection with clear and convincing evidence; therefore he is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA and the claim is rejected.

Citation: TB1-09888
Parties: Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Adjudicator: Patricia Greenside
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 28 February 2013
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision
Outcome: Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.
Legal Topics: State Protection, Dual Nationality, Burden of Proof, Convention Refugee Definition, Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
Source Language: English

Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law State Protection Dual Nationality Burden of Proof Convention Refugee Definition +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Patricia Greenside

Adjudicator

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimant, as a dual national, must establish risk in Germany as well as the Czech Republic
2 Whether Germany provides adequate state protection or the claimant has rebutted the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence
3 Whether the claimant exhausted or reasonably was required to exhaust domestic remedies in Germany

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.

Orders

Claim for refugee protection denied