TA8-23342

TA8-23342

Because the claimant failed to exhaust reasonable domestic remedies and did not produce clear and convincing evidence that Mexican state protection would be unavailable or ineffective, the presumption of adequate state protection was not rebutted and the claim must be rejected.

Citation
TA8-23342
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 December 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision (hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) of the IRPA.
Legal Topics
Domestic Violence, State Protection, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Burden of Proof, Gender Guidelines, Country Conditions (mexico)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Gender Based Violence Law Administrative Law Domestic Violence State Protection Exhaustion of Local Remedies +3 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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision (hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether the claimant faces a risk to life or torture on return
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection is available in Mexico

Ratio Decidendi

Because the claimant failed to exhaust reasonable domestic remedies and did not produce clear and convincing evidence that Mexican state protection would be unavailable or ineffective, the presumption of adequate state protection was not rebutted and the claim must be rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) of the IRPA.

Orders

  • Refugee claim rejected by Refugee Protection Division