TB0-03249

TB0-03249

Claimant was found credible on material facts but the conduct proved (checkpoint questioning, slapping, occasional beating and an extortion incident) constitutes harassment or security-driven misconduct in the context of Sri Lanka's conflict and, viewed cumulatively, does not meet the legal threshold for persecution or for the risks in s.97(1); therefore protection claim fails.

Citation
TB0-03249
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXXXXX; Respondent: The Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Refugee Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision After Hearing (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) of IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Persecution, Credibility, Risk Assessment, Ethnic Discrimination, Arbitrary Arrest and Detention, Extortion, Internal Armed Conflict
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Protection Refugee Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Persecution Credibility Risk Assessment +4 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXXXXX

Claimant

The Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision After Hearing (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97(1) of IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the incidents alleged amount to persecution

Ratio Decidendi

Claimant was found credible on material facts but the conduct proved (checkpoint questioning, slapping, occasional beating and an extortion incident) constitutes harassment or security-driven misconduct in the context of Sri Lanka's conflict and, viewed cumulatively, does not meet the legal threshold for persecution or for the risks in s.97(1); therefore protection claim fails.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection under sections 96 or 97(1) of IRPA.

Orders

  • Claim rejected
  • No protection granted