TA9-20646

TA9-20646

On the balance of probabilities the claimant failed to rebut the presumption of available state protection in Hungary with clear and convincing evidence; isolated incidents described do not demonstrate a systemic inability or refusal of the state to protect Roma and documentary evidence shows Hungary is making genuine efforts to address discrimination; therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TA9-20646
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXX; Co Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Final Decision
Outcome
Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; principal, co-claimant and minor are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Persecution, Roma Discrimination, Country Conditions, Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights State Protection Persecution Roma Discrimination Country Conditions Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies

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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Co Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Minor Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether state protection is available in Hungary for the claimants
  2. 2 Whether the claimant exhausted reasonably available domestic remedies
  3. 3 Whether the claimant qualifies as a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the claimant failed to rebut the presumption of available state protection in Hungary with clear and convincing evidence; isolated incidents described do not demonstrate a systemic inability or refusal of the state to protect Roma and documentary evidence shows Hungary is making genuine efforts to address discrimination; therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims; principal, co-claimant and minor are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claim of the principal claimant.
  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of the co-claimant and the minor claimant.