TA8-13684

TA8-13684

The panel rejected the claimant's evidence as not credible in material respects (implausible lack of detail, absence of alleged mistreatment inconsistent with country evidence), and held that generalized documentary evidence of widespread police abuse does not establish a personalized risk on return; therefore the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TA8-13684
Parties
Claimant (asylum Seeker): XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 November 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision of Refugee Protection Division (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant found to be neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Risk of Torture, Section 97 Protection, Credibility Assessment, Personalized Risk, Police Corruption, Arbitrary Arrest and Detention
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Risk of Torture Section 97 Protection +4 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant (asylum Seeker)

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision of Refugee Protection Division (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97 (risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment)
  3. 3 Credibility of the claimant's account of arrest, detention and police interest

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claimant's evidence as not credible in material respects (implausible lack of detail, absence of alleged mistreatment inconsistent with country evidence), and held that generalized documentary evidence of widespread police abuse does not establish a personalized risk on return; therefore the claimant fails to meet the tests under section 96 for Convention refugee status and section 97 for protection and the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant found to be neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected by Refugee Protection Division