MB3-02578

MB3-02578

The panel rejected the claim because the claimant's core testimony was not credible: material inconsistencies and omissions (membership details, payment for party card, addresses and failure to disclose being sought) contradicted documentary evidence and the ease of exit from Burundi undermined his allegation of being targeted; as a result he failed to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution under s.96 or, on the balance of probabilities, a risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment under s.97(1).

Citation
MB3-02578
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Merits Decision
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee under s.96 and not a person in need of protection under s.97(1) of the IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee, Risk of Torture, Persecution, Evidence Evaluation, Identity Documentation
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Risk of Torture Persecution +2 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Merits Decision

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(1) of the IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of the claimant's testimony and documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because the claimant's core testimony was not credible: material inconsistencies and omissions (membership details, payment for party card, addresses and failure to disclose being sought) contradicted documentary evidence and the ease of exit from Burundi undermined his allegation of being targeted; as a result he failed to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution under s.96 or, on the balance of probabilities, a risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment under s.97(1).

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee under s.96 and not a person in need of protection under s.97(1) of the IRPA.

Orders

  • Claim for refugee protection is rejected
  • Claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 of the IRPA and not a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1) of the IRPA