VB0-01530

VB0-01530

The claimant failed to prove an individualized, well‑founded fear of persecution or a real risk to life/cruel and unusual treatment or torture because the evidence establishes a reduction in federal operations in Chechnya, the claimant was not specifically identified or politically active in a manner likely to attract state targeting, and his subjective fears lack objective support; therefore the claim is denied under sections 96 and 97 of the Act.

Citation
VB0-01530
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Risk to Life, Torture, Persecution, Country Conditions, Credibility, Political Opinion, Civil War, Military Service
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Convention Refugee Risk to Life Torture Persecution Country Conditions +4 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
  3. 3 Whether the claimant faces an individualized risk due to ethnicity (Chechen) or political opinion

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to prove an individualized, well‑founded fear of persecution or a real risk to life/cruel and unusual treatment or torture because the evidence establishes a reduction in federal operations in Chechnya, the claimant was not specifically identified or politically active in a manner likely to attract state targeting, and his subjective fears lack objective support; therefore the claim is denied under sections 96 and 97 of the Act.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Claim rejected under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; no protection granted