TA9-14158

TA9-14158

The Panel rejected the claimants' claims because it found the principal claimant not credible on a balance of probabilities, found no nexus between the alleged extortion and a Convention ground, and alternatively found that adequate state protection was available in Mexico; accordingly the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TA9-14158
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa) / Decision (refusal)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection, State Protection, Credibility, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Extortion, Delay in Leaving Country
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Administrative Law Criminal Law (extortion) State Protection Convention Refugee Status Person in Need of Protection Credibility +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa) / Decision (refusal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the principal claimant is credible

Ratio Decidendi

The Panel rejected the claimants' claims because it found the principal claimant not credible on a balance of probabilities, found no nexus between the alleged extortion and a Convention ground, and alternatively found that adequate state protection was available in Mexico; accordingly the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under IRPA.