TA5-06493

TA5-06493

The Board found on the balance of probabilities that the claimant could relocate to Mexico City where adequate state protection and employment opportunities exist, so he does not have a well-founded fear of persecution and his refugee protection claim is rejected.

Citation
TA5-06493
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Designated Representative: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Sections 96 and 97(1) / Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Sexual Orientation, Convention Refugee Determination, Police Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Sexual Orientation Convention Refugee Determination Police Persecution

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX

Designated Representative

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Sections 96 and 97(1) / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether a viable internal flight alternative exists in Mexico City
  3. 3 Whether state authorities in Mexico City would provide adequate protection

Ratio Decidendi

The Board found on the balance of probabilities that the claimant could relocate to Mexico City where adequate state protection and employment opportunities exist, so he does not have a well-founded fear of persecution and his refugee protection claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection.