TA8-10636

TA8-10636

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption that Hungary can provide effective state protection with clear and convincing evidence, and a viable internal flight alternative exists (Budapest); therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TA8-10636
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
7 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection / Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Witness Protection, Organized Crime, Police Corruption
Source Language
English

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection / Decision

  1. 1 Whether the claimant has rebutted the presumption of state protection in Hungary
  2. 2 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) exists in Hungary
  3. 3 Whether the claimant qualifies as a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption that Hungary can provide effective state protection with clear and convincing evidence, and a viable internal flight alternative exists (Budapest); therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimant's claim for refugee protection