TB4-05448

TB4-05448

The panel rejected the claim because multiple, material inconsistencies, omissions and implausible explanations regarding the claimant's same-sex relationships, marital status and residence, together with an unexplained nearly five-year delay in filing, destroyed credibility on balance of probabilities; without credible proof of homosexuality or a risk on a Convention ground the claim fails under IRPA s.107(2).

Citation
TB4-05448
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX); Respondent: Minister (Canada); Decision Maker: Refugee Protection Division - Maureen Carty
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 November 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Merits (final Hearing and Reasons)
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
Sexual Orientation Claims, Credibility Assessment, Delay in Claiming, Corroboration, Convention Refugee Determination, Marital Status Implications
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Law Sexual Orientation Claims Credibility Assessment Delay in Claiming Corroboration +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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXX)

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Refugee Protection Division - Maureen Carty

Decision Maker

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Merits (final Hearing and Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee based on sexual orientation
  2. 2 Credibility of claimant's testimony and supporting evidence
  3. 3 Significance of almost five-year delay in making the refugee claim

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claim because multiple, material inconsistencies, omissions and implausible explanations regarding the claimant's same-sex relationships, marital status and residence, together with an unexplained nearly five-year delay in filing, destroyed credibility on balance of probabilities; without credible proof of homosexuality or a risk on a Convention ground the claim fails under IRPA s.107(2).

Court Disposition

Claim rejected

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claim.
  • Claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.