MA2-09434

MA2-09434

The claimant failed to produce acceptable identity documents and provided contradictory and unconvincing explanations for absent and deficient documents, including absence of passport and travel documents; accordingly he did not discharge the burden to establish identity or entitlement to refugee protection or...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
MA2-09434
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Respondent: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration; Tribunal/panel: Jean-Marie Chastenay
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 December 2003
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection rejected
Legal Topics
Identity Documents, Burden of Proof, Credibility, Probative Value, Convention Refugee Definition, Person in Need of Protection
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Evidence Identity Documents Burden of Proof Credibility Probative Value +2 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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent

Jean-Marie Chastenay

Tribunal/panel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant established his identity with acceptable documents
  2. 2 Whether the claimant met the burden to prove he is a Convention refugee
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to produce acceptable identity documents and provided contradictory and unconvincing explanations for absent and deficient documents, including absence of passport and travel documents; accordingly he did not discharge the burden to establish identity or entitlement to refugee protection or protection under s.97, and the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected

Orders

  • Claimant is not a Convention refugee within the meaning of s.96 IRPA and is not a person in need of protection under s.97 IRPA; claim rejected