TB6-10739

TB6-10739

The panel rejected the protection claims because it found the adult claimants not credible on their allegation of bisexuality (due to inconsistencies, similar narratives to another claim, suspect documents, implausible conduct and failure to seek protection in the USA), gave little weight to corroborative and psychological evidence, and concluded there was a viable internal flight alternative in Lagos; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB6-10739
Parties
Claimant: Principal claimant; Claimant and Designated Representative for Minor Claimants: Female claimant; Claimants (minors): Minor claimants; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 April 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility, Internal Flight Alternative, Sexual Orientation, Persecution, Convention Refugee, Protection Claim, Documentary Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Internal Flight Alternative Sexual Orientation Persecution Convention Refugee +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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Principal claimant

Claimant

Female claimant

Claimant and Designated Representative for Minor Claimants

Minor claimants

Claimants (minors)

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adult claimants are credible as bisexual and therefore at risk on a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether there is a nexus between asserted bisexuality/political activity and a risk of persecution or serious harm
  3. 3 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (Lagos) exists

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the protection claims because it found the adult claimants not credible on their allegation of bisexuality (due to inconsistencies, similar narratives to another claim, suspect documents, implausible conduct and failure to seek protection in the USA), gave little weight to corroborative and psychological evidence, and concluded there was a viable internal flight alternative in Lagos; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims denied; no protection granted