TB1-02147

TB1-02147

On the balance of probabilities the claimant was found generally not credible, failed to establish a nexus to a Convention ground, and did not rebut the presumption of adequate state protection with clear and convincing evidence; accordingly the claim fails under subsection 97(1) IRPA and the claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TB1-02147
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Claimant: Eugenia Cappellaro Zavaleta; Adjudicator: S.S. Kular
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 March 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Sections 96 and 97(1) / Decision and Reasons (final)
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Nexus, Subsection 97(1) Person in Need of Protection, Gang Violence (ms 13), Smuggling/extortion
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights State Protection Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Nexus Subsection 97(1) Person in Need of Protection +2 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 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Eugenia Cappellaro Zavaleta

Counsel for the Claimant

S.S. Kular

Adjudicator

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Sections 96 and 97(1) / Decision and Reasons (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant established nexus to a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether claimant's testimony was credible
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection is available in El Salvador

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the claimant was found generally not credible, failed to establish a nexus to a Convention ground, and did not rebut the presumption of adequate state protection with clear and convincing evidence; accordingly the claim fails under subsection 97(1) IRPA and the claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected

Orders

  • Claim of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX rejected; not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act