MA5-02838

MA5-02838

The claim was refused because the panel found the claimant's testimony not credible due to material contradictions and lack of independent corroboration, and documentary country evidence showed that a person of the claimant's profile does not face a reasonable possibility of persecution or torture by state or LTTE actors; accordingly the claimant did not satisfy s.96 or s.97(1) IRPA.

Citation
MA5-02838
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXX XXXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Raoul Boulakia; Panel Member: Barbara Berger; Refugee Protection Officer: Refugee Protection Officer; Minister's Counsel: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 December 2005
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Claim dismissed; refugee protection denied
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Late Disclosure, Natural Justice, Refugee Sur Place, State Protection, Country Conditions
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Late Disclosure +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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXX XXXXXX

Claimant

Me Raoul Boulakia

Claimant's Counsel

Barbara Berger

Panel Member

Refugee Protection Officer

Refugee Protection Officer

N/A

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Credibility of claimant's allegations of arrest, torture and LTTE land extortion

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was refused because the panel found the claimant's testimony not credible due to material contradictions and lack of independent corroboration, and documentary country evidence showed that a person of the claimant's profile does not face a reasonable possibility of persecution or torture by state or LTTE actors; accordingly the claimant did not satisfy s.96 or s.97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; refugee protection denied

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim dismissed