VB5-03903

VB5-03903

The Board rejected the claimants' asylum claims because the arrest warrants central to their fear were found not genuine and seriously undermined credibility of the documentary record; on the evidence the claimants failed to show persecution linked to a Convention ground and a reasonable internal flight alternative (relocation to Hyderabad) existed, therefore the claims under s.96 and s.97(1) of the IRPA are denied.

Citation
VB5-03903
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
1 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing on February 10, 2016; Decision Rendered March 1, 2016 by Refugee Protection Division (panel Member Preeti Adhopia)
Outcome
Claims denied
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, Document Authenticity, Torture and Risk to Life
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative Document Authenticity +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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing on February 10, 2016; Decision Rendered March 1, 2016 by Refugee Protection Division (panel Member Preeti Adhopia)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees within s.96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1) of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether arrest warrants and supporting documents are genuine and whether credibility is undermined by alleged false documents

Ratio Decidendi

The Board rejected the claimants' asylum claims because the arrest warrants central to their fear were found not genuine and seriously undermined credibility of the documentary record; on the evidence the claimants failed to show persecution linked to a Convention ground and a reasonable internal flight alternative (relocation to Hyderabad) existed, therefore the claims under s.96 and s.97(1) of the IRPA are denied.

Court Disposition

Claims denied

Orders

  • Claimants' claims for refugee protection under section 96 and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act are denied.