TB1-19097

TB1-19097

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption that Hungary can provide adequate state protection because documentary evidence and the claimants' own testimony showed police investigated incidents, remedies and oversight bodies exist, and the claimants did not take all reasonable domestic steps or provide clear and convincing evidence of state inability; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB1-19097
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spouse: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 March 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Persecution, Racial/ethnic Discrimination, Roma Rights, Convention Refugee Determination, Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law State Protection Persecution Racial/ethnic Discrimination Roma Rights Convention Refugee Determination +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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse

XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether state protection in Hungary is adequate for Roma claimants
  3. 3 Whether claimants took all reasonable steps to seek protection domestically

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption that Hungary can provide adequate state protection because documentary evidence and the claimants' own testimony showed police investigated incidents, remedies and oversight bodies exist, and the claimants did not take all reasonable domestic steps or provide clear and convincing evidence of state inability; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • The Refugee Protection Division rejects these claims