MA5-00862

MA5-00862

Claimant established identity and past domestic abuse and qualifies as a member of a particular social group (women), but failed to rebut the presumption of state protection; documentary evidence demonstrates laws, police action, training and emerging shelter/support services and therefore state protection is available and effective enough that removal does not create a serious possibility of persecution or meet s.97 risks; claim dismissed.

Citation
MA5-00862
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX; Decision Maker: Gordon McKenzie; Respondent: Refugee Protection Officer
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 February 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Rehearing (de Novo) Pursuant to Federal Court Order Dated July 13, 2006; Decision Issued February 21, 2007
Outcome
Claim rejected — claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Gender Based Persecution, Domestic Violence, Convention Refugee Definition, Country Conditions, Psychological Harm
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law Family Law/domestic Violence State Protection Gender Based Persecution Domestic Violence +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Gordon McKenzie

Decision Maker

Refugee Protection Officer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Rehearing (de Novo) Pursuant to Federal Court Order Dated July 13, 2006; Decision Issued February 21, 2007

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant qualifies as a Convention refugee under IRPA s.96
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under IRPA s.97(1)
  3. 3 Whether claimant's fear arises from membership in a particular social group (women)

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant established identity and past domestic abuse and qualifies as a member of a particular social group (women), but failed to rebut the presumption of state protection; documentary evidence demonstrates laws, police action, training and emerging shelter/support services and therefore state protection is available and effective enough that removal does not create a serious possibility of persecution or meet s.97 risks; claim dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected — claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Claim for refugee protection denied
  • No protection granted; removal may proceed pursuant to applicable immigration procedures