TB7-11948

TB7-11948

The decision turned on credibility and internal flight alternative: claimant accounts contained material inconsistencies, lacked corroborative business documentation and reliable particulars about extortion payments and ethnic targeting, and letters of support were not probative; country evidence did not demonstrate a likelihood of persecution and a viable internal flight alternative existed in Almaty at the wife's mother's residence, therefore claims fail under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TB7-11948
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Spouse: XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Reasons and Decision (merits)
Outcome
claims rejected
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Assessment, State Protection, Organized Crime, Ethnic Discrimination, Section 98 IRPA, Section 97(1) IRPA
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Assessment State Protection +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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX

Spouse

XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Reasons and Decision (merits)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 whether claimants are Convention refugees under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 whether claimants are persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 credibility of the claimants' account of extortion and ethnic targeting

Ratio Decidendi

The decision turned on credibility and internal flight alternative: claimant accounts contained material inconsistencies, lacked corroborative business documentation and reliable particulars about extortion payments and ethnic targeting, and letters of support were not probative; country evidence did not demonstrate a likelihood of persecution and a viable internal flight alternative existed in Almaty at the wife's mother's residence, therefore claims fail under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

claims rejected

Orders

  • Claims for refugee protection are rejected