TA7-14741

TA7-14741

Panel found claimant not credible regarding inability to leave, concluded police had intervened and country has statutory and institutional protections; claimant failed to rebut strong presumption of state protection on clear and convincing evidence, therefore no well‑founded fear of persecution nor need for protection under ss.96‑97 IRPA.

Citation
TA7-14741
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96 97) / Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
Particular Social Group, Gender Based Persecution, State Protection, Domestic Violence, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Particular Social Group Gender Based Persecution State Protection Domestic Violence Credibility Assessment

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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96 97) / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
  3. 3 Existence of nexus to a particular social group (women facing domestic/gender-based abuse)

Ratio Decidendi

Panel found claimant not credible regarding inability to leave, concluded police had intervened and country has statutory and institutional protections; claimant failed to rebut strong presumption of state protection on clear and convincing evidence, therefore no well‑founded fear of persecution nor need for protection under ss.96‑97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim dismissed by Refugee Protection Division