TA8-24497

TA8-24497

Claimants failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Mexico with clear and convincing evidence and did not take all reasonable steps to seek available domestic protection and remedies; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA.

Citation
TA8-24497
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (principal claimant); Spouse: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (spouse); Sister: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (sister); Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (minor claimant); Sister: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (sister); Minor Child: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (minor); Minor Child: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (minor); Designated Representative: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (Designated Representative); Counsel for the Claimant(s): Michael Korman; Counsel for the Minister: N/A; Tribunal Officer: T. Horbay; Panel Member: Robert Bafaro
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa) / Decision (merits)
Outcome
Refugee Protection Division rejects claims; claimants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies, Organized Crime, Police Corruption, Credible Fear Assessment, Convention Refugee Status
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Criminal Law Administrative Law State Protection Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies Organized Crime +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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (principal claimant)

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (spouse)

Spouse

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (sister)

Sister

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (minor claimant)

Minor Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (sister)

Sister

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (minor)

Minor Child

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (minor)

Minor Child

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX (Designated Representative)

Designated Representative

Michael Korman

Counsel for the Claimant(s)

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

T. Horbay

Tribunal Officer

Robert Bafaro

Panel Member

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa) / Decision (merits)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97(1) of IRPA
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection is available in Mexico

Ratio Decidendi

Claimants failed to rebut the presumption of adequate state protection in Mexico with clear and convincing evidence and did not take all reasonable steps to seek available domestic protection and remedies; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA.

Court Disposition

Refugee Protection Division rejects claims; claimants found neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the refugee and protection claims of all named claimants (decision dated April 21, 2010)