TB7-07363

TB7-07363

The appeal is dismissed because the appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection; objective country evidence, including Lithuania's 2011 domestic violence law and international reports on anti-corruption mechanisms, demonstrate that Lithuanian authorities can and will provide adequate protection such that the appellants' subjective fear and isolated past failures do not establish a need for refugee protection.

Citation
TB7-07363
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant Adult Son: XXXX XXXX; Appellant Minor Son: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 December 2017
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal From Refugee Protection Division Decision Confirming Refusal of Refugee Protection
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
State Protection, Domestic Violence, Credibility Assessment, Corruption, Women Refugee Claimants
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Family Law Human Rights State Protection Domestic Violence Credibility Assessment +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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Appellant Adult Son

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant Minor Son

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Appeal From Refugee Protection Division Decision Confirming Refusal of Refugee Protection

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants rebutted the presumption of state protection in Lithuania
  2. 2 Whether Lithuania can provide adequate protection for victims of domestic and gender-related violence
  3. 3 Whether allegations of police corruption or undue influence by the alleged abuser undermine state protection

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the appellants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection; objective country evidence, including Lithuania's 2011 domestic violence law and international reports on anti-corruption mechanisms, demonstrate that Lithuanian authorities can and will provide adequate protection such that the appellants' subjective fear and isolated past failures do not establish a need for refugee protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Pursuant to subsection 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the RPD determination is confirmed and the appeal is dismissed