TA6-00729

TA6-00729

The Tribunal concluded the documentary record showed the Mexican state is making serious efforts to provide protection against organized crime in the Federal District and federally, that legal remedies and reporting mechanisms exist, and that the claimants did not pursue available recourse; consequently they failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or a real risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment and the claims were rejected under ss.96 and 97 IRPA.

Citation
TA6-00729
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Refugee claims rejected
Legal Topics
State Protection, Drug Cartel Violence, Family Land Dispute, Abduction and Assault, Legal Recourse, Immigration and Refugee Protection Act Ss.96 97
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Criminal Law Administrative Law State Protection Drug Cartel Violence Family Land Dispute +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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants face persecution on a Convention ground or a danger of torture or cruel and unusual treatment
  2. 2 Whether Mexico provides adequate state protection against drug cartel violence, particularly in Mexico City
  3. 3 Whether legal recourse exists for the land dispute and past assaults and whether claimants pursued that recourse

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal concluded the documentary record showed the Mexican state is making serious efforts to provide protection against organized crime in the Federal District and federally, that legal remedies and reporting mechanisms exist, and that the claimants did not pursue available recourse; consequently they failed to prove a serious possibility of persecution or a real risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment and the claims were rejected under ss.96 and 97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Refugee claims rejected

Orders

  • Claims rejected pursuant to sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27.