TB2-09309

TB2-09309

Although the claimant established Somali identity on the balance of probabilities, he failed to provide reasonable corroborative documentation and offered evolving, implausible testimony; given his default on Rule 11 requests, the adverse credibility findings and the documentary country evidence which does not establish a serious possibility of persecution from Al‑Shabaab or clan violence in Mogadishu, the panel concluded the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under IRPA.

Citation
TB2-09309
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions, Documentary Corroboration, Risk From Non State Actors
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law International Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Country Conditions +2 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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA or a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  2. 2 Credibility of claimant and establishment of identity
  3. 3 Failure to provide requested documentary evidence including US asylum record and Mexican documents

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimant established Somali identity on the balance of probabilities, he failed to provide reasonable corroborative documentation and offered evolving, implausible testimony; given his default on Rule 11 requests, the adverse credibility findings and the documentary country evidence which does not establish a serious possibility of persecution from Al‑Shabaab or clan violence in Mogadishu, the panel concluded the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.