TA8-11696

The claim is rejected because the claimant was found not credible on key inconsistencies and she failed to provide clear and convincing evidence that state protection in South Korea was unavailable despite objective country documentation showing statutory and practical remedies; therefore she did not meet the standard for refugee protection or need for protection under IRPA.

Citation: TA8-11696
Parties: Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 18 March 2010
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision Following Hearing and Reasons
Outcome: refugee protection claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection
Legal Topics: Domestic Violence, State Protection, Credibility, Gender Guidelines, Child Protection, Delay in Making Claim
Source Language: English

Immigration Law Refugee Law Family Law Administrative Law Domestic Violence State Protection Credibility Gender Guidelines +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Final Decision Following Hearing and Reasons

Legal Issues

1 whether state protection was available in South Korea
2 credibility and consistency of the claimant's testimony
3 whether claimant took reasonable steps to seek state protection

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

refugee protection claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection