TB2-12677

TB2-12677

The claimant's testimony was found not credible due to significant inconsistencies and a systemic failure to provide independent corroboration of key facts (parents' arrest, residence, schooling, travel); therefore she failed to establish a well-founded fear under s.96 or a need for protection under s.97 IRPA, and the claim was rejected.

Citation
TB2-12677
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (rpd Decision)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Protection Claim Under S.97 IRPA, Credibility and Corroboration, Non Refoulement
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Determination Protection Claim Under S.97 IRPA Credibility and Corroboration Non Refoulement

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

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

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's testimony was found not credible due to significant inconsistencies and a systemic failure to provide independent corroboration of key facts (parents' arrest, residence, schooling, travel); therefore she failed to establish a well-founded fear under s.96 or a need for protection under s.97 IRPA, and the claim was rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA

Orders

  • Claim rejected; not a Convention refugee under s.96 and not a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA