TA9-04389

TA9-04389

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection because the principal claimant did not take reasonable steps to seek police protection since 2006, her testimony lacked corroboration, and objective country information demonstrates available legal and institutional protections for Roma in the Czech Republic, therefore the Board found state protection adequate and rejected the refugee and protection claims.

Citation
TA9-04389
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent (minister): Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Ethnic Discrimination, Reavailment, Credibility, Exhaustion of Remedies, Family Claim, Roma Rights
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Human Rights Administrative Law State Protection Ethnic Discrimination Reavailment Credibility +3 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Claimant

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (Canada)

Respondent (minister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants qualify as Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether the Czech Republic provides adequate state protection for Roma claimants
  3. 3 Whether the principal claimant exhausted or reasonably sought state protection prior to re‑availing to Canada

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection because the principal claimant did not take reasonable steps to seek police protection since 2006, her testimony lacked corroboration, and objective country information demonstrates available legal and institutional protections for Roma in the Czech Republic, therefore the Board found state protection adequate and rejected the refugee and protection claims.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Principal claimant's refugee protection claim is rejected.
  • Minor claimant's refugee protection claim is rejected.