TA6-00550

TA6-00550

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence: documentary country reports and legal frameworks for Trinidad and Tobago and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines demonstrate available remedies and institutional capacity to protect against domestic violence, and the claimant's delay and long re‑availment of protection abroad undermine the credibility and intensity of any present fear; accordingly the claim fails for both Convention refugee and section 97 protection grounds.

Citation
TA6-00550
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
12 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention Refugee and is not a person in need of protection under section 97 of the IRPA.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Domestic Violence, Particular Social Group (women), Delay and Re‑availment, Convention Against Torture, Risk to Life/cruel and Unusual Treatment, Gender Guidelines
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Family Law Criminal Law State Protection Domestic Violence Particular Social Group (women) +4 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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant rebutted the presumption of state protection
  2. 2 Whether the claimant has a well‑founded fear of persecution as a woman subjected to domestic violence
  3. 3 Whether the claimant meets the threshold for protection under the Convention Against Torture or section 97 (risk to life/cruel and unusual treatment)

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence: documentary country reports and legal frameworks for Trinidad and Tobago and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines demonstrate available remedies and institutional capacity to protect against domestic violence, and the claimant's delay and long re‑availment of protection abroad undermine the credibility and intensity of any present fear; accordingly the claim fails for both Convention refugee and section 97 protection grounds.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention Refugee and is not a person in need of protection under section 97 of the IRPA.