TA8-17118

TA8-17118

Claimants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they faced persecution or that state protection in the Czech Republic was absent or inadequate; documentary evidence showed serious state efforts to address Roma discrimination and credibility concerns undermined key allegations, therefore refugee protection was not warranted.

Citation
TA8-17118
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (age 29); Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (born 1962, age 48); Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (age 48); Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (age 28); Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (born 1995, age 14); Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (born 2000, age 10); Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (age 7); Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX (age 4)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 September 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
refugee protection claims rejected
Legal Topics
Ethnic Discrimination, Roma Rights, Forced Sterilization, State Protection, Persecution, Credibility Assessment, Education Segregation, Hate Crimes
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Ethnic Discrimination Roma Rights Forced Sterilization State Protection +4 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX (age 29)

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (born 1962, age 48)

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (age 48)

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (age 28)

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (born 1995, age 14)

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (born 2000, age 10)

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (age 7)

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX (age 4)

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether claimants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 whether alleged mistreatment amounts to persecution by reason of Roma ethnicity
  3. 3 whether state protection in the Czech Republic is inadequate

Ratio Decidendi

Claimants failed to prove on a balance of probabilities that they faced persecution or that state protection in the Czech Republic was absent or inadequate; documentary evidence showed serious state efforts to address Roma discrimination and credibility concerns undermined key allegations, therefore refugee protection was not warranted.

Court Disposition

refugee protection claims rejected

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims for refugee protection.