TB0-08314
The claims were rejected because the Tribunal found the claimants' central allegations not credible—key rent receipts were likely fabricated, testimonial explanations were inconsistent, corroborating business evidence for the critical period was absent, and the fact they were issued exit visas undermined any objective basis to find they would be persecuted on return.
- Citation
- TB0-08314
- Parties
- Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (male claimant); Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX (female claimant)
- Court
- Refugee Protection Division
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 12 July 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Refugee Protection Claim / Decision
- Outcome
- Claims rejected
- Legal Topics
- Political Opinion, Credibility, Persecution, Risk of Torture, Dangerousness Provision, Exit Visa, Fabricated Documents
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
XXXXXXXXXXXXXX (male claimant)
Claimant
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXX (female claimant)
Claimant
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the claimants qualify as Convention refugees
- 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) of the IRPA
- 3 Whether the claimants' evidence is credible and reliable
Ratio Decidendi
The claims were rejected because the Tribunal found the claimants' central allegations not credible—key rent receipts were likely fabricated, testimonial explanations were inconsistent, corroborating business evidence for the critical period was absent, and the fact they were issued exit visas undermined any objective basis to find they would be persecuted on return.
Court Disposition
Claims rejected
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment