TA9-17426

The claimant failed to prove a nexus between his fear and any Convention ground and only faced a generalized risk of criminal violence in Jamaica rather than a personalized risk of persecution; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Citation: TA9-17426
Parties: Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 3 October 2011
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Claim (irpa S.96 and S.97) / Reasons and Decision (final)
Outcome: Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under s.96 and s.97 of the IRPA
Legal Topics: Nexus to Convention Grounds, Generalized Risk Vs Personalized Risk, Vendetta/revenge, Victim of Crime, Persecution, Section 96, Section 97
Source Language: English

Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Criminal Law Nexus to Convention Grounds Generalized Risk Vs Personalized Risk Vendetta/revenge Victim of Crime +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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa S.96 and S.97) / Reasons and Decision (final)

Legal Issues

1 Whether the claimant established a nexus between his fear and a Convention ground
2 Whether the risk to the claimant was personalized or a generalized risk of criminality
3 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 or a person in need of protection under s.97

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under s.96 and s.97 of the IRPA

Orders

Refugee claim rejected