MA7-07299

Although the panel accepted the factual allegations as credible, the claimants did not prove that the Mexican State was unwilling or unable to protect them nor that they exhausted or pursued reasonable state remedies, and they failed to establish that no viable internal flight alternative existed; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation: MA7-07299
Parties: Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Spouse: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Child: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 27 August 2009
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection Claim / Decision at Refugee Protection Division Following Hearing
Outcome: Claim rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics: State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Persecution, Risk of Torture, Risk of Cruel and Unusual Treatment
Source Language: English

Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Persecution 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Spouse

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Decision at Refugee Protection Division Following Hearing

Legal Issues

1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees
2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection
3 Whether the State was unwilling or unable to protect them

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.

Orders

The claim for refugee protection filed by the principal claimant, his spouse and their minor children is rejected.