TB0-06288

TB0-06288

Claimant holds Croatian citizenship and would be legally able to reside in Croatia; country documentation does not show a real risk of persecution of ethnic Croatians from Serbia and claimant's personal evidence is insufficient to establish more than a mere possibility of ill‑treatment; therefore claimant failed to establish a well‑founded fear under s.96 and failed to prove risk under s.97, and the claim is denied.

Citation
TB0-06288
Parties
Claimant / Asylum Seeker: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 July 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Merits Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed; refugee protection denied
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Well Founded Fear, Person in Need of Protection, Country of Origin Information, Nationality/citizenship
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Well Founded Fear Person in Need of Protection Country of Origin Information Nationality/citizenship

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant / Asylum Seeker

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Merits Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97 of IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is a Croatian citizen and can return to Croatia

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant holds Croatian citizenship and would be legally able to reside in Croatia; country documentation does not show a real risk of persecution of ethnic Croatians from Serbia and claimant's personal evidence is insufficient to establish more than a mere possibility of ill‑treatment; therefore claimant failed to establish a well‑founded fear under s.96 and failed to prove risk under s.97, and the claim is denied.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; refugee protection denied

Orders

  • Claimant's claim for refugee protection under section 96 IRPA is denied
  • Claimant is not found to be a person in need of protection under section 97 IRPA