TA8-09803

TA8-09803

The claimant's assaults and threats were infrequent and sporadic and do not demonstrate sustained or systemic persecution; the claimant's prolonged delay in leaving Botswana undermines a well-founded fear; Botswana's Domestic Violence Act provides adequate state protection; therefore the claimant does not meet the threshold for a Convention refugee under s.96 nor for protection under s.97 IRPA.

Citation
TA8-09803
Parties
Claimant (asylum Seeker): XXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister (Government of Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97 / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (hearing Held May 26, 2010; Decision June 30, 2010)
Outcome
Claim rejected: claimant is neither a Convention Refugee under s.96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Domestic Violence, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Gender Guidelines, Psychological Report, Delay in Leaving Country
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Refugee Protection Human Rights Gender Based Violence Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Domestic Violence State Protection +5 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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant (asylum Seeker)

Minister (Government of Canada)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Ss.96 and 97 / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (hearing Held May 26, 2010; Decision June 30, 2010)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Claimant identity and nationality
  2. 2 Membership in a particular social group (women subject to intimate partner violence)
  3. 3 Whether claimant faces serious risk of persecution under s.96 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's assaults and threats were infrequent and sporadic and do not demonstrate sustained or systemic persecution; the claimant's prolonged delay in leaving Botswana undermines a well-founded fear; Botswana's Domestic Violence Act provides adequate state protection; therefore the claimant does not meet the threshold for a Convention refugee under s.96 nor for protection under s.97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected: claimant is neither a Convention Refugee under s.96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.