MA8-03358

MA8-03358

The claimants failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that the harm feared was connected to a Convention ground and failed to rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence, compounded by unjustified delay and failure to seek available local remedies; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.

Citation
MA8-03358
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Derivative Claimant (sister): XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 September 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (ss.96,97) / Hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Refugee protection claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Persecution, Particular Social Group, Delay in Claiming Protection, Corruption, Summons/witness Intimidation, Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Protection Administrative Law Human Rights State Protection Persecution Particular Social Group Delay in Claiming Protection +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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Derivative Claimant (sister)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (ss.96,97) / Hearing and Decision by Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the harm feared is connected to a Convention ground (s.96 IRPA)
  2. 2 Whether the state is unwilling or unable to provide protection (s.97(1)(b) IRPA)
  3. 3 Whether the claimants are members of a particular social group

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that the harm feared was connected to a Convention ground and failed to rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence, compounded by unjustified delay and failure to seek available local remedies; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claims dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claims rejected/dismissed