TB1-01692

TB1-01692

The claim was rejected because the Panel found the claimant's testimony not credible and uncorroborated, the asserted power/status of the alleged persecutor was not proven, and country evidence showed that state protection and support mechanisms in Saint Lucia were available; accordingly the claimant failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution under s.96 or a risk to life/cruel and unusual treatment/torture under s.97.

Citation
TB1-01692
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division (rpd)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee under s.96 and not to be a person in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, State Protection Assessment, Credibility and Corroboration, Gender Based Persecution, Protection Under S.97 (risk to Life/cruel and Unusual Treatment/torture)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Determination State Protection Assessment Credibility and Corroboration Gender Based Persecution Protection Under S.97 (risk to Life/cruel and Unusual Treatment/torture)

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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division (rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's evidence is credible and corroborated

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was rejected because the Panel found the claimant's testimony not credible and uncorroborated, the asserted power/status of the alleged persecutor was not proven, and country evidence showed that state protection and support mechanisms in Saint Lucia were available; accordingly the claimant failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution under s.96 or a risk to life/cruel and unusual treatment/torture under s.97.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee under s.96 and not to be a person in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA

Orders

  • Claim rejected