TB0-07893

TB0-07893

The claimants' allegations were not found credible on the balance of probabilities, there was no persuasive evidence of a nexus to a Convention ground (incidents were criminal/extortion), country conditions in Sri Lanka have materially improved since 2009 reducing the risk of persecution, and any risk alleged is a generalized risk excluded by s.97(1)(b)(ii); accordingly the claims fail under ss.96 and 97 IRPA.

Citation
TB0-07893
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division Decision)
Outcome
Claims rejected
Legal Topics
Credibility, Change of Country Conditions, Generalized Risk, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Section 97 Exclusion
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility Change of Country Conditions Generalized Risk Nexus to Convention Grounds Section 97 Exclusion

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of claimants' allegations

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' allegations were not found credible on the balance of probabilities, there was no persuasive evidence of a nexus to a Convention ground (incidents were criminal/extortion), country conditions in Sri Lanka have materially improved since 2009 reducing the risk of persecution, and any risk alleged is a generalized risk excluded by s.97(1)(b)(ii); accordingly the claims fail under ss.96 and 97 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected

Orders

  • Claims are rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees under section 96 IRPA nor persons in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA