TB1-17937

TB1-17937

The claimant failed to establish, on the applicable standards, that she converted to Christianity and was a persecuted member of an underground church or that the PSB is interested in her; material inconsistencies, lack of corroboration (including travel documents and contemporaneous reports), and country information about exit controls rendered her account implausible and insufficient to meet the tests under ss.96 and 97 IRPA, so the claim is rejected.

Citation
TB1-17937
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister of Immigration; Decision Maker: Anthony da Silva / Immigration and Refugee Board
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 September 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Decision Following Hearing and Reasons
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Religious Persecution, Credibility and Corroboration, Exit and Border Controls
Source Language
English

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister of Immigration

Respondent

Anthony da Silva / Immigration and Refugee Board

Decision Maker

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Decision Following Hearing and Reasons

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(a) or (b) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether claimant genuinely converted to Christianity and was a member of an underground house church

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to establish, on the applicable standards, that she converted to Christianity and was a persecuted member of an underground church or that the PSB is interested in her; material inconsistencies, lack of corroboration (including travel documents and contemporaneous reports), and country information about exit controls rendered her account implausible and insufficient to meet the tests under ss.96 and 97 IRPA, so the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected