TA9-08321

TA9-08321

On the totality of evidence the presumption of state protection for Roma in the Czech Republic was not rebutted with clear and convincing evidence; documentary record showed adequate state mechanisms and police responses in many instances and the claimants failed to exhaust available remedies and did not demonstrate systemic or widespread state inability or unwillingness to protect, therefore claims under sections 96 and 97 IRPA fail.

Citation
TA9-08321
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXX; Spouse: XXXXXX XXXXXX; Child: XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Sections 96 and 97 / Final Merits Hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Refugee claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Racial Discrimination, Exhaustion of Local Remedies, Country Evidence Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Protection Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law State Protection Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Racial Discrimination +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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXX XXXXXX

Spouse

XXXXX XXXXX

Child

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA Sections 96 and 97 / Final Merits Hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97 IRPA
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection is available in the Czech Republic

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of evidence the presumption of state protection for Roma in the Czech Republic was not rebutted with clear and convincing evidence; documentary record showed adequate state mechanisms and police responses in many instances and the claimants failed to exhaust available remedies and did not demonstrate systemic or widespread state inability or unwillingness to protect, therefore claims under sections 96 and 97 IRPA fail.

Court Disposition

Refugee claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Claims under section 96 and section 97 IRPA are rejected
  • Claim of dependent son dismissed as dependent on parents' failed claims