TB1-05417

TB1-05417

The claimant's refugee claim is rejected because on the balance of probabilities the Tribunal found her testimony not credible, identified material contradictions and failures to provide corroborative documentation, and concluded she did not rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary by clear and convincing evidence, therefore she is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 IRPA.

Citation
TB1-05417
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division Hearing)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Gender Based Persecution, Ethnic Discrimination (roma), Documentary Corroboration
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law State Protection Credibility Assessment Gender Based Persecution Ethnic Discrimination (roma) Documentary Corroboration

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 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant's allegations of abduction, sexual assault and threats are credible
  2. 2 Whether the claimant rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary with clear and convincing evidence
  3. 3 Whether discrimination against Roma in Hungary rises to the level of persecution in this claimant's case

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's refugee claim is rejected because on the balance of probabilities the Tribunal found her testimony not credible, identified material contradictions and failures to provide corroborative documentation, and concluded she did not rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Hungary by clear and convincing evidence, therefore she is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection