MB6-07514

MB6-07514

The panel drew adverse credibility inferences from material omissions and contradictions in the claimant's statutory forms and testimony (failure to list addresses, inconsistent employment dates, denial of prior detention), found the claimant not credible in all material respects, and concluded the claimant failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture; therefore the claim was rejected under IRPA ss.96 and 97.

Citation
MB6-07514
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 and 97) / Hearing and Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant found neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Persecution, Torture, Ethnicity Based Claims, Evidence and Documentary Proof, Omissions in Immigration Forms
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Persecution Torture +3 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 4 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 and 97) / Hearing and Final Decision by Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under IRPA s.96
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under IRPA s.97
  3. 3 Credibility and reliability of claimant's testimony

Ratio Decidendi

The panel drew adverse credibility inferences from material omissions and contradictions in the claimant's statutory forms and testimony (failure to list addresses, inconsistent employment dates, denial of prior detention), found the claimant not credible in all material respects, and concluded the claimant failed to establish a serious possibility of persecution or risk of torture; therefore the claim was rejected under IRPA ss.96 and 97.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant found neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected; no protection granted