Search - convention

The RPD found that the Applicant did not have a nexus to a Convention ground of complaint, and lacked a forward facing personalized risk. ... (2) Is there a nexus to one of the Convention grounds in the definition of a Convention refugee? ... The four issues raised by the Applicant are findings related to whether the Applicant provided sufficient evidence to establish a nexus to a Convention ground and/or his alleged personalized risk. ...

One judgment and reasons is therefore produced as it is common to the two files and copy of these reasons will be put on each file as being the reasons for judgment. [3]   The applicants seek permanent residence in Canada as members of the Convention refugee abroad class. ... On this record, the circumstances under which the crossing of the border for a quick return to Lebanon remain nebulous. [10]   On September 6, 2018, the applicants attended an interview at the Canadian Embassy in Beirut in relation to their applications for permanent residence as possible members of the Convention refugee abroad class. ... At best, the letter provides that the classes are the Convention refugee abroad class and the Country of asylum class, without assisting the reader as to what those classes may encompass. ...

Introduction [1]   This is an application for judicial review of the decision dated January 3, 2019, of the Refugee Protection Division [RPD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board [IRB] that the Applicants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection as defined in sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c 27 [IRPA]. [2]   For the reasons that follow, this application is dismissed. ... The RPD found, after considering the totality of the evidence, that “the claimants failed to provide sufficient credible or trustworthy evidence to discharge their onus of establishing that a serious possibility of persecution based on a Convention ground exists or that, on a balance of probabilities, they would be subjected personally to a danger of torture or face a risk to life, or a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment” in relation to Israel (for Ms. ... Sections 95-97 define who is eligible for refugee protection: Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (S.C. 2001, c. 27) Loi sur l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés (L.C. 2001, ch. 27)...... 95 (1) Refugee protection is conferred on a person when 95 (1) L’asile est la protection conférée à toute personne dès lors que, selon le cas: (a) the person has been determined to be a Convention refugee or a person in similar circumstances under a visa application and becomes a permanent resident under the visa or a temporary resident under a temporary resident permit for protection reasons; a) sur constat qu’elle est, à la suite d’une demande de visa, un réfugié au sens de la Convention ou une personne en situation semblable, elle devient soit un résident permanent au titre du visa, soit un résident temporaire au titre d’un permis de séjour délivré en vue de sa protection; (b) the Board determines the person to be a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection; or b) la Commission lui reconnaît la qualité de réfugié au sens de la Convention ou celle de personne à protéger; (c) except in the case of a person described in subsection 112(3), the Minister allows an application for protection. c) le ministre accorde la demande de protection, sauf si la personne est visée au paragraphe 112(3). … … 96 A Convention refugee is a person who, by reason of a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group or political opinion, 96 A qualité de réfugié au sens de la Convention — le réfugié — la personne qui, craignant avec raison d’être persécutée du fait de sa race, de sa religion, de sa nationalité, de son appartenance à un groupe social ou de ses opinions politiques: (a) is outside each of their countries of nationality and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of each of those countries; or a) soit se trouve hors de tout pays dont elle a la nationalité et ne peut ou, du fait de cette crainte, ne veut se réclamer de la protection de chacun de ces pays;   (b) not having a country of nationality, is outside the country of their former habitual residence and is unable or, by reason of that fear, unwilling to return to that country. b) soit, si elle n’a pas de nationalité et se trouve hors du pays dans lequel elle avait sa résidence habituelle, ne peut ni, du fait de cette crainte, ne veut y retourner. 97 (1) A person in need of protection is a person in Canada whose removal to their country or countries of nationality or, if they do not have a country of nationality, their country of former habitual residence, would subject them personally 97 (1) A qualité de personne à protéger la personne qui se trouve au Canada et serait personnellement, par son renvoi vers tout pays dont elle a la nationalité ou, si elle n’a pas de nationalité, dans lequel elle avait sa résidence habituelle, exposée: (a) to a danger, believed on substantial grounds to exist, of torture within the meaning of Article 1 of the Convention Against Torture; or a) soit au risque, s’il y a des motifs sérieux de le croire, d’être soumise à la torture au sens de l’article premier de la Convention contre la torture; (b) to a risk to their life or to a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment if b) soit à une menace à sa vie ou au risque de traitements ou peines cruels et inusités dans le cas suivant: (i) the person is unable or, because of that risk, unwilling to avail themself of the protection of that country, (i) elle ne peut ou, de ce fait, ne veut se réclamer de la protection de ce pays, (ii) the risk would be faced by the person in every part of that country and is not faced generally by other individuals in or from that country, (ii) elle y est exposée en tout lieu de ce pays alors que d’autres personnes originaires de ce pays ou qui s’y trouvent ne le sont généralement pas, (iii) the risk is not inherent or incidental to lawful sanctions, unless imposed in disregard of accepted international standards, and (iii) la menace ou le risque ne résulte pas de sanctions légitimes — sauf celles infligées au mépris des normes internationales — et inhérents à celles-ci ou occasionnés par elles, (iv) the risk is not caused by the inability of that country to provide adequate health or medical care. ...

It is readiy apparent that the residence of Dr Lipsey is of crucial importance in the taxation years 1979 and 1980 to determine his liability to taxation in the jurisdiction of one or other of the parties to the Canada — US Tax Convention. The Convention has a preamble which declares two of the objectives to be: (1) the avoidance of double taxation and (2) the prevention of fiscal evasion in the case of income taxes. ... From the voluminous information of which the Department of National Revenue appears to be possessed including information obtained from its US counterpart pursuant to Article XXI of the Convention it would appear that the officials of the Department could readily make that determination. ...

  [6]                Le 24 novembre 1991, la Section du statut de réfugié a rejeté la revendication du statut de réfugié de monsieur Nozarian et a conclu qu’il n’était pas un réfugié au sens de la Convention.  ... Le 19 juillet 2001, le Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l’Immigration fait une demande d’intervention devant la Section de la protection des réfugiés (SPR) en vertu de la section F de l’article premier de la Convention des Nations Unies relative au statut des réfugiés. [20]            Le 30 avril 2003, la SPR rejette la demande d’asile de monsieur Nozarian et conclut qu’il n’est pas un réfugié au sens de la Convention.  ...

His brother, who lives in Canada as a permanent resident, and a church group sponsored his application for permanent residence under the Convention Refugee Abroad class and Humanitarian-Protected Persons Abroad class in 2011. [2]   In a letter dated February 8, 2018, an Officer at the High Commission of Canada in Pretoria refused the application because the Applicant had provided inconsistent and conflicting information. ... After outlining the statutory requirements to obtain permanent residence in Canada as a member of the Convention Refugee Abroad class or as a member of the Humanitarian-Protected Persons Abroad class, the Officer stated as follows: … I am not satisfied that you are a member of any of the classes prescribed because during your interview on 19 May 2017, you provided inconsistent and conflicting information. ... Standard of Review [6]   It is well-established that an officer’s decision as to whether an applicant is a member of the Convention Refugee Abroad class or the Humanitarian-Protected Persons Abroad class is a question of mixed fact and law reviewable on the reasonableness standard (Helal v Canada (Citizenship & Immigration), 2019 FC 37 at para 14; Sar v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 1147 at para 19; Gebrewldi v Canada (Citizenship & Immigration), 2017 FC 621 at para 14; Abdi v Canada (Citizenship & Immigration), 2016 FC 1050 at para 18; Bakhtiari v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2013 FC 1229 at para 22; Qarizada v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 1310 at para 15; and Saifee v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2010 FC 589 at para 25). [7]   The reasonableness standard tasks the Court with reviewing an administrative decision for “the existence of justification, transparency and intelligibility within the decision-making process” and determining “whether the decision falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes which are defensible in respect of the facts and law” (Dunsmuir v New Brunswick, 2008 SCC 9 at para 47). ...

The Refugee Protection Division [RPD] of the Immigration and Refugee Board determined in a decision dated October 24, 2018, that the Applicant was neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection. [2]   The Applicant has now applied under subsection 72(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c-27 [IRPA], for judicial review of the RPD’s decision. ... The RPD’s Decision [3]   After summarizing the Applicant’s allegations, the RPD found that he had not satisfied the burden of establishing a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground, or that, on a balance of probabilities, he would personally be subjected to a risk to life or a risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment or a danger of torture upon return to China. [4]   The RPD noted that, while there is a presumption that the Applicant’s sworn allegations are true, it had reason to doubt the truthfulness of his allegations. ... Conclusion [26]   The RPD’s reasons for its determination that the Applicant was neither a Convention refugee, nor a person in need of protection, are intelligible, transparent, and justifiable, and the decision falls within a range of possible, acceptable outcomes defensible in respect of the facts and law. ...

Since there was no lease, there was no hope of a mortgage: (1) The plan of the Western International Hotels was to take only 25% interest in a hotel property and the balance of 75% was to be financed by local people. (2) The Western International Hotels Ltd became interested in the Convention Centre for Victoria which was centred around the Empress Hotel, and the Western Company was not interested in having two hotels in the one city. (3) Money became tight. ... Lemery testified that the Convention Centre planned around the Empress Hotel was a bombshell to his property and he tried to encourage the City to relocate the Convention Centre, or at least to interest it in his property but without success. ...

Edisher Patashuri (the “Applicant”) seeks judicial review of the decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Appeal Division (the “RAD”), confirming the decision of the Refugee Protection Division (the “RPD”) that he is neither a Convention refugee  nor   a person in need of protection within the meaning of section 96 and subsection 97(1), respectively, of the  Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the “Act”). [2]   The Applicant is a citizen of Georgia. ...

The Income Tax Convention between Canada and the United States, Article III(2) provides: The competent authority of the taxing State may, when necessary, in execution of paragraph 1 of this Article, rectify the accounts produced, notably to correct errors and omissions or to re-establish the prices or remunerations entered in the books at the value which would prevail between independent persons dealing at arm's length. ...