MA2-04395

MA2-04395

The panel rejected the claim because the principal claimant was found not credible, failed to produce required corroborative documents, demonstrated delay inconsistent with a subjective fear, and because any risk was from non‑state actors with an internal flight alternative available; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the claim has no credible basis.

Citation
MA2-04395
Parties
Claimant: Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: Ms. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 January 2003
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection; claim has no credible basis.
Legal Topics
Particular Social Group, Credibility, Internal Flight Alternative, Delay in Making Claim, Documentary Evidence, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Particular Social Group Credibility Internal Flight Alternative Delay in Making Claim Documentary Evidence +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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Ms. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether the principal claimant was credible
  3. 3 Whether documentary evidence required by the Board was produced

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because the principal claimant was found not credible, failed to produce required corroborative documents, demonstrated delay inconsistent with a subjective fear, and because any risk was from non‑state actors with an internal flight alternative available; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection and the claim has no credible basis.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection; claim has no credible basis.