TA1-15686

TA1-15686

Applying the Adjei 'serious possibility' standard, the panel accepted the claimant's credible evidence that armed security forces acting with moneylenders threatened the claimants over an unpayable debt, that state protection would not be provided because security forces act with moneylenders, and that no internal flight alternative existed; accordingly the claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b).

Citation
TA1-15686
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 October 2002
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Section 97(1)(b) IRPA / Hearing/decision
Outcome
Claims accepted; claimants found to be persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Person in Need of Protection, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Nexus, Standard of Proof, Risk to Life, Cruel and Unusual Treatment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Person in Need of Protection State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Nexus Standard of Proof +2 more

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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Section 97(1)(b) IRPA / Hearing/decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants face a risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment under s.97(1)(b) IRPA
  2. 2 Whether there is a nexus to a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether Syrian security forces act on behalf of moneylenders

Ratio Decidendi

Applying the Adjei 'serious possibility' standard, the panel accepted the claimant's credible evidence that armed security forces acting with moneylenders threatened the claimants over an unpayable debt, that state protection would not be provided because security forces act with moneylenders, and that no internal flight alternative existed; accordingly the claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b).

Court Disposition

Claims accepted; claimants found to be persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b) IRPA.

Orders

  • Claims for refugee protection accepted; claimants granted protection as persons in need of protection under s.97(1)(b)