MB5-01191

MB5-01191

The claimant's credibility was substantially undermined by inconsistencies and evasive testimony (including abandoning a U.S. asylum claim without satisfactory explanation and inconsistent dates/details about detention), and objective country evidence did not establish that his profile (young Tamil from the north, failed refugee) would make him personally liable to persecution or torture; therefore he failed to discharge the burden to prove he is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.

Citation
MB5-01191
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Immigration)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Proceeding Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (reasons and Decision Issued)
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection rejected
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Risk of Torture, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions, Forced Recruitment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Risk of Torture Credibility Assessment Country Conditions Forced Recruitment

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Immigration)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Proceeding Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision (reasons and Decision Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1) of IRPA (risk of torture or death)
  3. 3 Whether there is a nexus between the claimant's fear and a Convention ground (race - Tamil)

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's credibility was substantially undermined by inconsistencies and evasive testimony (including abandoning a U.S. asylum claim without satisfactory explanation and inconsistent dates/details about detention), and objective country evidence did not establish that his profile (young Tamil from the north, failed refugee) would make him personally liable to persecution or torture; therefore he failed to discharge the burden to prove he is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected

Orders

  • Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimant not found to be a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection