TA1-25548

TA1-25548

The claimant's evidence was found not credible and he failed to produce corroborating police or bank documentation and did not rebut the presumption that Hungarian authorities can provide adequate protection; therefore the claim fails under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Citation
TA1-25548
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Refugee claim rejected
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credibility, Police Corruption, Money Laundering, Burden of Proof, Sections 96 and 97 IRPA
Source Language
English

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing

  1. 1 Whether the claimant was credible about being forced off the road and robbed
  2. 2 Whether unauthorized deposits and money laundering targeting the claimant occurred
  3. 3 Whether the claimant reported the incidents to police and presented documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's evidence was found not credible and he failed to produce corroborating police or bank documentation and did not rebut the presumption that Hungarian authorities can provide adequate protection; therefore the claim fails under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Court Disposition

Refugee claim rejected

Orders

  • Refugee claim dismissed; no protection granted