TB1-04121

TB1-04121

Panel rejected the claim because the claimant's testimony was found not credible in key respects undermining any subjective fear, and alternatively, credible country evidence shows durable improvements and that claimant would not, on a balance of probabilities, be perceived as LTTE-linked or face a serious risk of persecution or torture; therefore claim fails under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TB1-04121
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX (aka XXXX XXXX); Respondent/minister: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
23 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 & 97) / Hearing and Decision (rpd)
Outcome
Claimant's refugee protection claim is rejected; not a Convention refugee under s.96 and not in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Credibility Assessment, Sur Place, Change of Country Conditions, Risk of Torture, Exclusion/article 1 F
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Refugee Protection Credibility Assessment Sur Place Change of Country Conditions Risk of Torture +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 5 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX (aka XXXX XXXX)

Claimant

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)

Respondent/minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 & 97) / Hearing and Decision (rpd)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether claimant's testimony is credible and establishes a subjective fear

Ratio Decidendi

Panel rejected the claim because the claimant's testimony was found not credible in key respects undermining any subjective fear, and alternatively, credible country evidence shows durable improvements and that claimant would not, on a balance of probabilities, be perceived as LTTE-linked or face a serious risk of persecution or torture; therefore claim fails under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claimant's refugee protection claim is rejected; not a Convention refugee under s.96 and not in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.

Orders

  • Claimant's claim for refugee protection is dismissed by the RPD (reasons dated January 23, 2015)