TB2-11570

TB2-11570

Given material credibility deficiencies (unsubstantiated travel history, improbable continual PSB interest, suspect documentary evidence inconsistent with PRC law) and objective country guidance that private Falun Gong practice does not normally attract persecution, the claimant failed to establish a well-founded...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
TB2-11570
Parties
Claimant (asylum Seeker): XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister of Immigration
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Sections 96 and 97) / Hearing and Decision (first Instance Panel Decision)
Outcome
Claim rejected: claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Sur Place Claim, Credibility Assessment, Falun Gong, Documentary Authenticity
Source Language
english
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Sur Place Claim Credibility Assessment +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

XXXX XXXX

Claimant (asylum Seeker)

Minister of Immigration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Sections 96 and 97) / Hearing and Decision (first Instance Panel Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Credibility of the claimant and documentary evidence
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(a) or (b) IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

Given material credibility deficiencies (unsubstantiated travel history, improbable continual PSB interest, suspect documentary evidence inconsistent with PRC law) and objective country guidance that private Falun Gong practice does not normally attract persecution, the claimant failed to establish a well-founded fear of persecution under s.96 or that he is a person in need of protection under s.97(1); the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected: claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Claim dismissed; refugee protection claim rejected
  • No protection granted