TA9-08613

TA9-08613

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of effective state protection by clear and convincing evidence; documentary evidence and the testimonial record show the Czech Republic is a functioning democracy with legislative and institutional measures and an adequate police and judicial response to hate crimes, and the specific incidents did not demonstrate state-wide inability or refusal to protect; therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TA9-08613
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXX; Respondent: Minister (Respondent)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 January 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Claims rejected
Legal Topics
State Protection, Ethnic Discrimination (roma), Police Response, Convention Refugee Status, Persons in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Country Conditions State Protection Ethnic Discrimination (roma) Police Response +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Minister (Respondent)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants rebutted the presumption of state protection in the Czech Republic
  2. 2 Whether claimants meet the definition of Convention refugee or person in need of protection
  3. 3 Credibility and sufficiency of documentary and testimonial evidence regarding police response and country conditions

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of effective state protection by clear and convincing evidence; documentary evidence and the testimonial record show the Czech Republic is a functioning democracy with legislative and institutional measures and an adequate police and judicial response to hate crimes, and the specific incidents did not demonstrate state-wide inability or refusal to protect; therefore the claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected

Orders

  • Claims rejected; the claimants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection