TA5-04806

TA5-04806

Because the claimant's testimony contained significant implausibilities, omissions, lack of corroboration and unjustified delay, the panel found her not credible and determined on a balance of probabilities she was not a practicing Christian in China prior to arrival and does not face a serious possibility of persecution or need of protection if returned to China, warranting a negative decision.

Citation
TA5-04806
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection Claim / Refugee Protection Division Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed; negative decision — claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Credibility, Sur Place, Persecution, Freedom of Religion, Delay, Production of Documents, Asylum Claim
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Religion Credibility Sur Place Persecution +4 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 9 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection Claim / Refugee Protection Division Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 credibility of claimant
  2. 2 whether claimant practiced Christianity in China prior to arrival
  3. 3 whether claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution on religious grounds

Ratio Decidendi

Because the claimant's testimony contained significant implausibilities, omissions, lack of corroboration and unjustified delay, the panel found her not credible and determined on a balance of probabilities she was not a practicing Christian in China prior to arrival and does not face a serious possibility of persecution or need of protection if returned to China, warranting a negative decision.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; negative decision — claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Decision dated 12 April 2006: claim dismissed and negative determination rendered.
  • Panel ruled claimant's counsel would question first at hearing contrary to Chairperson's Guideline 7; see Appendix A.