TA8-02761

TA8-02761

Claimant failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Mexico by clear and convincing evidence, made no effort to seek available remedies, and a viable internal flight alternative exists in Guadalajara; therefore he is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection and the claim is rejected.

Citation
TA8-02761
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division (decision Dated 2009 08 18)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Sexual Orientation, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Determination, Burden of Proof, Non Refoulement
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Sexual Orientation State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Determination Burden of Proof +1 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 4 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division (decision Dated 2009 08 18)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution for a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether adequate state protection is available in Mexico
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative (Guadalajara) is viable

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Mexico by clear and convincing evidence, made no effort to seek available remedies, and a viable internal flight alternative exists in Guadalajara; therefore he is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection and the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.