MB0-05877

MB0-05877

The panel rejected all claims because (1) fundamental credibility findings (inconsistent testimony, failure to seek protection in other countries, late/undocumented PIF and suspect police document) rendered the claimants' evidence unreliable; (2) the husband failed to establish a cognizable PSG; and (3) even accepting targeting, the objective evidence shows the risk is one faced generally by large subgroups in El Salvador (generalized risk under s.97), so no protection is warranted.

Citation
MB0-05877
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Claimant: XXXX XXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 April 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Section 97 IRPA, Particular Social Group, Credibility Findings, Generalized Risk, Nexus
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Refugee Protection Section 97 IRPA Particular Social Group Credibility Findings Generalized Risk +1 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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants qualify as Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the husband belongs to a cognizable particular social group

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected all claims because (1) fundamental credibility findings (inconsistent testimony, failure to seek protection in other countries, late/undocumented PIF and suspect police document) rendered the claimants' evidence unreliable; (2) the husband failed to establish a cognizable PSG; and (3) even accepting targeting, the objective evidence shows the risk is one faced generally by large subgroups in El Salvador (generalized risk under s.97), so no protection is warranted.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims of all three claimants dismissed