TA6-13336

TA6-13336

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption of state protection: country evidence showed functioning police, laws, a domestic violence unit, NGO support and a shelter; the claimant did not exhaust reasonable local remedies and the perpetrator had not taken effective steps to pursue her, therefore state protection is adequate and the claim fails under both sections 96 and 97 of the IRPA.

Citation
TA6-13336
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 May 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Final Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Convention Refugee (s.96 Irpa), Person in Need of Protection (s.97 Irpa), Credibility Assessment, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Chairperson's Guidelines on Gender Related Persecution
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Gender Based Violence Domestic Violence State Protection Convention Refugee (s.96 Irpa) Person in Need of Protection (s.97 Irpa) +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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97 of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether Grenada can provide adequate state protection

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption of state protection: country evidence showed functioning police, laws, a domestic violence unit, NGO support and a shelter; the claimant did not exhaust reasonable local remedies and the perpetrator had not taken effective steps to pursue her, therefore state protection is adequate and the claim fails under both sections 96 and 97 of the IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Claim rejected