VB2-03660

VB2-03660

Although the claimant was found credible about the assaults, the panel concluded that Ecuadorian authorities took investigatory steps (police reports, referral to prosecutors, medical examinations), the claimant failed to pursue higher or alternate state remedies, and there was no clear and convincing evidence that state protection would be unavailable or inadequate; accordingly the claim was rejected under sections 96 and 97 because state protection was reasonably available.

Citation
VB2-03660
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (final)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Persecution Based on Sexual Orientation
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law State Protection Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment +1 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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (final)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether state protection was available and was reasonably accessible

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimant was found credible about the assaults, the panel concluded that Ecuadorian authorities took investigatory steps (police reports, referral to prosecutors, medical examinations), the claimant failed to pursue higher or alternate state remedies, and there was no clear and convincing evidence that state protection would be unavailable or inadequate; accordingly the claim was rejected under sections 96 and 97 because state protection was reasonably available.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Claimant's refugee protection claim is rejected
  • Claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act