TB2-07157

TB2-07157

The panel rejected the claim because it found the claimant generally not credible on key factual elements, gave little weight to supporting documents, determined there was no serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground nor a personal risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment on return, and found sur place and failed‑asylum‑seeker/generalized risk arguments insufficient to meet the protection threshold.

Citation
TB2-07157
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX (aka XXXX XXXX); Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 February 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97 / Hearing and Decision at Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Sur Place, Failed Asylum‑seekers, Generalized Risk, Convention Refugee Status, Protection Claim
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Sur Place Failed Asylum‑seekers Generalized Risk Convention Refugee Status +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 6 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX (aka XXXX XXXX)

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97 / Hearing and Decision at Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(a) or (b) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of claimant's evidence and documentary support

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because it found the claimant generally not credible on key factual elements, gave little weight to supporting documents, determined there was no serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground nor a personal risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment on return, and found sur place and failed‑asylum‑seeker/generalized risk arguments insufficient to meet the protection threshold.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected