TB1-14389

TB1-14389

Claim dismissed because the claimant was found not credible and failed to meet the burden of clear and convincing evidence that state protection in Georgia is unavailable; travel history and failure to seek asylum in Europe undermined subjective fear, and independent court, police and medical records contradicted key elements of the claimant's account, so there is less than a mere possibility of persecution or risk of cruel treatment on return.

Citation
TB1-14389
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa) / Refugee Protection Division Decision
Outcome
Claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 97(1)(a) or 97(1)(b) of the IRPA; claim rejected
Legal Topics
Credibility, State Protection, Convention Refugee Status, Delay in Filing, Risk Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility State Protection Convention Refugee Status Delay in Filing Risk Assessment

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

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa) / Refugee Protection Division Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is credible and has subjective fear of persecution
  2. 2 Whether claimant exhausted options and delay undermines claim
  3. 3 Whether state protection in Georgia is adequate

Ratio Decidendi

Claim dismissed because the claimant was found not credible and failed to meet the burden of clear and convincing evidence that state protection in Georgia is unavailable; travel history and failure to seek asylum in Europe undermined subjective fear, and independent court, police and medical records contradicted key elements of the claimant's account, so there is less than a mere possibility of persecution or risk of cruel treatment on return.

Court Disposition

Claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 97(1)(a) or 97(1)(b) of the IRPA; claim rejected

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimant's claim for refugee protection