TA5-06188

TA5-06188

The panel rejected the claimant's testimony as not credible based on material inconsistencies, contradictions, omissions and lack of corroborative evidence for the pivotal alleged fatal accident and threats; alternatively, even if the claimant were homosexual, an internal flight alternative in Colombo or Kandy exists and societal discrimination does not amount to persecution, therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TA5-06188
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Refugee Protection Officer; Respondent: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Convention Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision at the Refugee Protection Division (rpd)
Outcome
Refugee claim dismissed; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Particular Social Group, Sexual Orientation, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Person in Need of Protection, Risk of Torture, Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Convention Refugee Particular Social Group Sexual Orientation Internal Flight Alternative State Protection +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 6 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Refugee Protection Officer

Respondent

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Convention Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision at the Refugee Protection Division (rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Credibility of claimant
  2. 2 Claimant's sexual orientation/identity as gay
  3. 3 Alleged death of partner and threats of revenge

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claimant's testimony as not credible based on material inconsistencies, contradictions, omissions and lack of corroborative evidence for the pivotal alleged fatal accident and threats; alternatively, even if the claimant were homosexual, an internal flight alternative in Colombo or Kandy exists and societal discrimination does not amount to persecution, therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Refugee claim dismissed; claimant found not to be a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected
  • Claimant is not a person in need of protection