MA6-03415

MA6-03415

The claimant's credibility was undermined by evasive testimony and a complete failure to produce corroborative documents without adequate explanation; combined with evidence that an internal flight alternative in another large Mexican city was reasonable, the claimant did not satisfy the requirements of ss.96 or 97 and the refugee protection claim was rejected.

Citation
MA6-03415
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Refugee Protection Officer
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection / Hearing/decision (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Production of Documents, RPD Rules (rule 7)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Production of Documents +1 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Refugee Protection Officer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection / Hearing/decision (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Credibility of claimant
  2. 2 Failure to provide corroborative documents under Rule 7
  3. 3 Existence and reasonableness of internal flight alternative (IFA)

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's credibility was undermined by evasive testimony and a complete failure to produce corroborative documents without adequate explanation; combined with evidence that an internal flight alternative in another large Mexican city was reasonable, the claimant did not satisfy the requirements of ss.96 or 97 and the refugee protection claim was rejected.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected