MA4-06309

MA4-06309

The panel rejected the claimant's credibility based on inconsistent accounts, deliberate concealment and false identity at port of entry, unexplained late additions to the narrative coinciding with obtained documents, and probable fabrication of corroborative documents; on that basis the claimant was not found to be a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
MA4-06309
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Ethan Alan Friedman; Panel Member: Louise Robic; Refugee Protection Officer: Refugee Protection Officer; Designated Representative: N/A; Minister's Counsel: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Final Decision
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected
Legal Topics
Particular Social Group, Domestic Violence, Credibility Assessment, Detention, False Documents, Corroboration, Interpretation Services, Probative Value, Asylum Claim
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Particular Social Group Domestic Violence Credibility Assessment Detention False Documents +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Ethan Alan Friedman

Claimant's Counsel

Louise Robic

Panel Member

Refugee Protection Officer

Refugee Protection Officer

N/A

Designated Representative

N/A

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Final Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection
  3. 3 Credibility of the claimant's account and documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claimant's credibility based on inconsistent accounts, deliberate concealment and false identity at port of entry, unexplained late additions to the narrative coinciding with obtained documents, and probable fabrication of corroborative documents; on that basis the claimant was not found to be a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected