TA8-05044

TA8-05044

The claimants’ allegations lacked a nexus to a Convention ground and were found not credible on multiple material inconsistencies and omissions; therefore they are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA, warranting dismissal of their claims.

Citation
TA8-05044
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 January 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96 97) / Final Decision After Multi‑sitting Hearing; Claim Determined by Panel Following Claimant/counsel Failure to Appear for Final Sitting
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants found not to be Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.
Legal Topics
Nexus to Convention Grounds, Credibility and Evidentiary Weight, Protection Under S.97 IRPA, Asylum Claim, Failure of Counsel/withdrawal, Omissions in Pif/poe, Fraud/genuineness
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Nexus to Convention Grounds Credibility and Evidentiary Weight Protection Under S.97 IRPA Asylum Claim +3 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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96 97) / Final Decision After Multi‑sitting Hearing; Claim Determined by Panel Following Claimant/counsel Failure to Appear for Final Sitting

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees (nexus to protected ground)
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA (risk to life, torture or cruel and unusual treatment)
  3. 3 Credibility and weight of documentary and oral evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants’ allegations lacked a nexus to a Convention ground and were found not credible on multiple material inconsistencies and omissions; therefore they are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA, warranting dismissal of their claims.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants found not to be Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA.

Orders

  • Decision dated January 20, 2009: claimants' protection claims dismissed
  • Hearing concluded and file reserved by panel after failure of claimants and counsel to appear