MA7-02044

MA7-02044

The claimant failed to discharge the burden of proof because she did not seek or follow up on state protection, did not provide clear and convincing evidence that Mexico could not protect her, and an internal flight alternative was reasonable and available; therefore she is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
MA7-02044
Parties
Claimant: Mrs. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 November 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (merits)
Outcome
Claim rejected
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Gender Based Persecution, Domestic Violence, Burden of Proof, Convention Refugee
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Gender Based Persecution Domestic Violence +2 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 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mrs. XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision (merits)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant has a well-founded fear of persecution
  2. 2 Availability and sufficiency of state protection in Mexico
  3. 3 Applicability of internal flight alternative

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to discharge the burden of proof because she did not seek or follow up on state protection, did not provide clear and convincing evidence that Mexico could not protect her, and an internal flight alternative was reasonable and available; therefore she is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected

Orders

  • Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection.