TB0-11131

TB0-11131

The claimants' refugee claims are rejected because the principal claimant was found not credible on central aspects of his claim and failed to rebut, by clear and convincing evidence, the presumption that Colombia can provide adequate state protection; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection and the joined claims fail.

Citation
TB0-11131
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spouse Co Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Child Co Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Counsel for the Claimant(s): Michael Loebach; Counsel for the Minister: N/A
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 August 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Refugee Protection Division Decision Following Hearing
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) of the IRPA
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Country Condition Analysis
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law State Protection Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Country Condition Analysis

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 12 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse Co Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Child Co Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Michael Loebach

Counsel for the Claimant(s)

N/A

Counsel for the Minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Refugee Protection Division Decision Following Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97(1) of the IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimant has rebutted the presumption of adequate state protection in Colombia with clear and convincing evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants' refugee claims are rejected because the principal claimant was found not credible on central aspects of his claim and failed to rebut, by clear and convincing evidence, the presumption that Colombia can provide adequate state protection; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection and the joined claims fail.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) of the IRPA

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claims of the principal claimant, his spouse and joined minor child