VB1-02171

VB1-02171

Claimants were credible but their fear stemmed from generalized criminality lacking nexus to a Convention ground and the risk they face is shared widely by similarly situated Mexicans; therefore they do not qualify as Convention refugees under s.96 nor as persons in need of protection under s.97.

Citation
VB1-02171
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Hearing and Decision (oral 14 Feb 2012; Written Reasons 09 Mar 2012)
Outcome
Claims rejected: claimants are not Convention refugees (s.96) and are not persons in need of protection (s.97).
Legal Topics
Generalized Violence, Gang Violence, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Personalized Risk, Generalized Risk, Credibility Assessment, Risk of Torture, Section 96, Section 97
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Generalized Violence Gang Violence Nexus to Convention Grounds Personalized Risk +5 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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 97) / Hearing and Decision (oral 14 Feb 2012; Written Reasons 09 Mar 2012)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under s.96
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97
  3. 3 Whether harm is individualized or generalized

Ratio Decidendi

Claimants were credible but their fear stemmed from generalized criminality lacking nexus to a Convention ground and the risk they face is shared widely by similarly situated Mexicans; therefore they do not qualify as Convention refugees under s.96 nor as persons in need of protection under s.97.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected: claimants are not Convention refugees (s.96) and are not persons in need of protection (s.97).

Orders

  • Claims rejected under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
  • Decision rendered orally 14 February 2012; written reasons dated 09 March 2012 by Gordon C. McRae.