MA8-15625

MA8-15625

Claim denied because the panel found the claimant's allegations not credible and inadequately corroborated, determined that state protection and internal relocation were plausible options, and concluded there was no established risk of persecution or torture warranting refugee or protected person status under sections 96 or 97 IRPA.

Citation
MA8-15625
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Ethan Alan Friedman; Panel/tribunal: Stephen J. Gallagher; Tribunal Officer: Linda Parker; Minister's Counsel: N/A; Designated Representative: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Under IRPA / Hearing and Merits Decision Denying Claim
Outcome
Claim denied; claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA and not a person in need of protection under section 97 IRPA
Legal Topics
Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault/rape, State Protection, Internal Relocation, Credibility Assessment, Production of Documents, Failure to Seek Protection in Another Country
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Gender Based Violence Domestic Violence Sexual Assault/rape State Protection Internal Relocation +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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Ethan Alan Friedman

Claimant's Counsel

Stephen J. Gallagher

Panel/tribunal

Linda Parker

Tribunal Officer

N/A

Minister's Counsel

N/A

Designated Representative

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Under IRPA / Hearing and Merits Decision Denying Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether claimant faces risk of torture under CAT

Ratio Decidendi

Claim denied because the panel found the claimant's allegations not credible and inadequately corroborated, determined that state protection and internal relocation were plausible options, and concluded there was no established risk of persecution or torture warranting refugee or protected person status under sections 96 or 97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim denied; claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA and not a person in need of protection under section 97 IRPA