MA6-08604

MA6-08604

The husband is a private actor and not a state agent for purposes of CAT; the claimant had access to and in fact declined state protection in Korea; the risk arises only if the claimant seeks out her husband and a reasonable internal flight alternative exists, therefore the claimant did not meet the burden to establish she is a person in need of protection under s.97 and the claim is rejected.

Citation
MA6-08604
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Refugee Protection Officer (Nicolas Nolin); Decision Maker: Gilles Guénette
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision on Merits
Outcome
Claim rejected (denied): removal permitted
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Torture (cat), Section 97(1)(b) Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Domestic Violence, Change of Circumstances, Negative Determination
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Torture (cat) Section 97(1)(b) Internal Flight Alternative State Protection +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 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Refugee Protection Officer (Nicolas Nolin)

Respondent

Gilles Guénette

Decision Maker

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision on Merits

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA or a person in need of protection under s.97(1)(a) (torture)
  2. 2 Whether the feared persecutor (husband) acted as a state agent for purposes of CAT
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection exists in South Korea

Ratio Decidendi

The husband is a private actor and not a state agent for purposes of CAT; the claimant had access to and in fact declined state protection in Korea; the risk arises only if the claimant seeks out her husband and a reasonable internal flight alternative exists, therefore the claimant did not meet the burden to establish she is a person in need of protection under s.97 and the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected (denied): removal permitted