TB2-10363

TB2-10363

The Tribunal found the claimant not credible on key facts: he did not reliably establish he practiced Falun Gong in China or Canada, his documentary evidence was self-serving or lacked probative features, and his account of leaving China using a genuine passport was inconsistent with national documentation and his...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TB2-10363
Parties
Claimant / Asylum Seeker: XXXX XXXX (a.k.a XXXX XXXX XXXX); Respondent: Minister of Immigration
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Claimant's refugee protection claim rejected; claimant found neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Religious Persecution, Exit Controls and Travel Documentation, Falun Gong
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Religious Persecution Exit Controls and Travel Documentation +1 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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX (a.k.a XXXX XXXX XXXX)

Claimant / Asylum Seeker

Minister of Immigration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97 of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimant genuinely practiced Falun Gong in China or Canada

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found the claimant not credible on key facts: he did not reliably establish he practiced Falun Gong in China or Canada, his documentary evidence was self-serving or lacked probative features, and his account of leaving China using a genuine passport was inconsistent with national documentation and his own testimony; on the balance of probabilities these findings defeat his claim and therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claimant's refugee protection claim rejected; claimant found neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimant's claim.