TA8-14366

TA8-14366

The tribunal rejected the claims because the adjudicator found the claimant not credible, concluded key documents depended on his unreliable testimony (including an apparently altered death certificate and inconsistent accounts about a declared blood feud and the brother's status), and found no evidence state protection would be inadequate; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution and the claims fail under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TA8-14366
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXX XXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (refugee Protection Division) / Final Decision (rejection)
Outcome
Refugee claims rejected
Legal Topics
Blood Feud, Credibility Findings, State Protection Adequacy, Document Authenticity
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Protection Refugee Law State Protection Blood Feud Credibility Findings State Protection Adequacy Document Authenticity

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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (refugee Protection Division) / Final Decision (rejection)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether state protection in the United States was inadequate
  2. 2 Whether claimants face a real risk in Albania due to a declared blood feud
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's evidence and documentary proof are credible and reliable

Ratio Decidendi

The tribunal rejected the claims because the adjudicator found the claimant not credible, concluded key documents depended on his unreliable testimony (including an apparently altered death certificate and inconsistent accounts about a declared blood feud and the brother's status), and found no evidence state protection would be inadequate; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution and the claims fail under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Refugee claims rejected

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of the named claimants pursuant to section 96 and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.