TA9-17714

TA9-17714

The panel found on a balance of probabilities that the claimants were victims of generalized criminality and extortion by gangs (Mara Salvatrucha/M-18), that their fear was not linked to a Convention ground and could not be personalized beyond being perceived as relatively wealthy, and that the risk is one faced generally by the population of Honduras; accordingly the claimants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TA9-17714
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Claimant (male): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Son: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Refugee Protection Division / Hearing and Decision (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) of the IRPA
Legal Topics
Generalized Risk, Gang Violence, Extortion, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Failure to Claim Elsewhere, Section 96 IRPA, Section 97 IRPA
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law Generalized Risk Gang Violence Extortion Nexus to Convention Grounds +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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant (male)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Son

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Refugee Protection Division / Hearing and Decision (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97(1) of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether there is nexus between the claimed risk and a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The panel found on a balance of probabilities that the claimants were victims of generalized criminality and extortion by gangs (Mara Salvatrucha/M-18), that their fear was not linked to a Convention ground and could not be personalized beyond being perceived as relatively wealthy, and that the risk is one faced generally by the population of Honduras; accordingly the claimants are neither Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) of the IRPA

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX for refugee protection