VB0-03910

VB0-03910

The claimants were targeted because they were perceived as relatively wealthy business owners, which constitutes a generalized risk faced by a subset of the population rather than persecution linked to a Convention ground; wealth does not form a particular social group and there is no individualized nexus to a protected ground, therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees and do not meet s.97(1) protection criteria.

Citation
VB0-03910
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 March 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa) / Refugee Protection Division Decision
Outcome
Claimants' refugee protection claims rejected; not Convention refugees under s96 nor persons in need of protection under s97(1) of IRPA.
Legal Topics
Extortion, Gang Violence, Particular Social Group (nexus), Generalized Risk Under S97, Country Condition Evidence, Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Criminal/organized Crime Violence Extortion Gang Violence Particular Social Group (nexus) Generalized Risk Under S97 Country Condition Evidence Credibility

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa) / Refugee Protection Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under s96
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s97(1)
  3. 3 Whether extortion/organized crime amounts to persecution linked to a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants were targeted because they were perceived as relatively wealthy business owners, which constitutes a generalized risk faced by a subset of the population rather than persecution linked to a Convention ground; wealth does not form a particular social group and there is no individualized nexus to a protected ground, therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees and do not meet s.97(1) protection criteria.

Court Disposition

Claimants' refugee protection claims rejected; not Convention refugees under s96 nor persons in need of protection under s97(1) of IRPA.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims (decision dated 21 March 2012)