TA8-03367

TA8-03367

On the balance of probabilities the panel found the claimant's identity was not established because of material inconsistencies in testimony and documentary evidence, probative documents (RIC, Hukou, certificates, receipts) were found to be of little or no probative value or fraudulent, and the claimant was not a credible witness; accordingly the refugee claim was rejected without assessing the merits of persecution or protection claims under IRPA.

Citation
TA8-03367
Parties
Claimant: XX XXXX XX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 July 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Reasons/decision
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant found not credible and identity not established
Legal Topics
Identity, Credibility, Fraudulent Documents, Resident Identity Card (ric), Hukou (household Registration), Religious Practice
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Identity Credibility Fraudulent Documents Resident Identity Card (ric) Hukou (household Registration) +1 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XX XXXX XX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Reasons/decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's identity as a Chinese national was established
  2. 2 Whether documentary evidence (RIC, Hukou, marriage and birth certificates, lease receipts) were authentic or fraudulent
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's testimony was credible such that refugee protection should be granted

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the panel found the claimant's identity was not established because of material inconsistencies in testimony and documentary evidence, probative documents (RIC, Hukou, certificates, receipts) were found to be of little or no probative value or fraudulent, and the claimant was not a credible witness; accordingly the refugee claim was rejected without assessing the merits of persecution or protection claims under IRPA.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant found not credible and identity not established

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim dismissed
  • No further assessment of persecution or need for protection undertaken due to failure to establish identity