TB4-11086

TB4-11086

The panel rejected the claimant's evidence as not credible on a balance of probabilities due to material inconsistencies, contradictions and omissions regarding the alleged arrests, the timing and procurement of documents and the role of an agent, and the claimant's failure to seek asylum in the United States despite a valid five-year visa; absent credible evidence of a personalized risk or demonstrable links to LTTE risk profiles, the claimant does not face a well-founded fear of persecution or risk of torture on return.

Citation
TB4-11086
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Immigration authorities)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96 and 97) / Merits Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Well Founded Fear of Persecution, Risk of Torture or Cruel and Unusual Treatment, Failure to Seek Protection in a Safe Third Country, Political/terrorist Association (ltte) Profile
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Credibility Assessment Well Founded Fear of Persecution Risk of Torture or Cruel and Unusual Treatment Failure to Seek Protection in a Safe Third Country +1 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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Immigration authorities)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96 and 97) / Merits Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is credible
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution
  3. 3 Whether the claimant faces a personalized risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment on return

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claimant's evidence as not credible on a balance of probabilities due to material inconsistencies, contradictions and omissions regarding the alleged arrests, the timing and procurement of documents and the role of an agent, and the claimant's failure to seek asylum in the United States despite a valid five-year visa; absent credible evidence of a personalized risk or demonstrable links to LTTE risk profiles, the claimant does not face a well-founded fear of persecution or risk of torture on return.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Orders

  • Refugee claim rejected
  • No protection granted