MA8-08712

MA8-08712

The panel rejected the claim because it found the claimant not credible, objectively unreasonable in failing to pursue available state protection, and unable to prove on the balance of probabilities a real risk of persecution or torture linked to a Convention ground.

Citation
MA8-08712
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 September 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (convention Refugee / Person in Need of Protection) / Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Persecution (political Opinion), Risk of Torture, Abduction, Threats
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Refugee Protection State Protection Credibility Assessment Persecution (political Opinion) Risk of Torture +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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (convention Refugee / Person in Need of Protection) / Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant qualifies as a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection
  3. 3 Credibility of claimant's allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because it found the claimant not credible, objectively unreasonable in failing to pursue available state protection, and unable to prove on the balance of probabilities a real risk of persecution or torture linked to a Convention ground.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim dismissed; no protection granted.