TB1-04576

TB1-04576

Recusal denied because no reasonable apprehension of bias was shown and the contested documents were available; independently, the claimants' prolonged sojourn in the USA and failure to seek asylum there despite capacity to do so undermines their subjective fear and credibility, and on the balance of probabilities they have not established a serious possibility of persecution or need for protection, therefore claims are rejected.

Citation
TB1-04576
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Secondary Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (sections 96 and 97(1)) / Decision (refugee Protection Division Hearing and Reasons)
Outcome
Motion for recusal denied; refugee claims rejected. Claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Persecution, Recusal/reasonable Apprehension of Bias, Credibility, Failure to Seek Asylum in Third Country, Subjective Fear, Political Opinion
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Persecution Recusal/reasonable Apprehension of Bias Credibility Failure to Seek Asylum in Third Country +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 15 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Secondary Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (sections 96 and 97(1)) / Decision (refugee Protection Division Hearing and Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a reasonable apprehension of bias requiring recusal
  2. 2 Whether claimants' failure to seek asylum in the USA undermines subjective fear and credibility
  3. 3 Whether claimants meet the test for Convention refugee status or need of protection

Ratio Decidendi

Recusal denied because no reasonable apprehension of bias was shown and the contested documents were available; independently, the claimants' prolonged sojourn in the USA and failure to seek asylum there despite capacity to do so undermines their subjective fear and credibility, and on the balance of probabilities they have not established a serious possibility of persecution or need for protection, therefore claims are rejected.

Court Disposition

Motion for recusal denied; refugee claims rejected. Claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Motion for recusal denied (July 27, 2012)
  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims (Decision dated August 13, 2012)