TA9-18629

TA9-18629

The claimant failed to rebut the strong presumption of effective state protection in St. Vincent and the Grenadines because she did not take reasonable steps to seek police or state protection and did not present clear and convincing evidence of state inability or unwillingness to protect; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TA9-18629
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXX; Child Claimant: XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 January 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97(1) / Hearing and Decision (merits)
Outcome
Refugee protection claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Particular Social Group (women), Gender Based Persecution, Domestic Violence, Sexual Assault, Prostitution, Torture
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Gender Based Violence Criminal Law State Protection Particular Social Group (women) Gender Based Persecution +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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXXXX XXXXXXXX XXXXX

Child Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97(1) / Hearing and Decision (merits)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection exists in St. Vincent and the Grenadines/Grenada

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to rebut the strong presumption of effective state protection in St. Vincent and the Grenadines because she did not take reasonable steps to seek police or state protection and did not present clear and convincing evidence of state inability or unwillingness to protect; therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims for refugee protection