Giraldo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052

JurisdictionFederal Jurisdiction (Canada)
CourtFederal Court (Canada)
Citation2020 FC 1052
Date13 November 2020
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
5 practice notes
  • Donarus v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 1457
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • December 22, 2021
    ...this distinction and assessed the evidence relating to state protection accordingly: see Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052 at para 14. The overall weighing of the evidence bearing on risk to the applicant in Mexico and the availability of effective recourse was th......
  • Contreras Luevano v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 1467
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • December 23, 2021
    ...(Magonza v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 14 at paras 72, 75 (Magonza); Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052 at para 14). [25] I agree with the Principal Applicant that the officer failed to assess the operational ability of the Mexican authorities to ......
  • Zapata v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 1277
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • September 9, 2022
    ...it was reasonably open to the RAD to find that the Applicants had not met their burden (Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052 at para 19). (3) Conclusion [19] It is trite law that claimants must seek protection from their home state before going to a different country......
  • Rahman v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 516
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 11, 2022
    ...adequacy of the protection, not merely the state’s efforts: see Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052, at para 14 (and the cases cited there); Moya v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 315, [2016] 4 FCR 113, at paras 73, 78 and 80. The state’s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
5 cases
  • Donarus v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 1457
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • December 22, 2021
    ...this distinction and assessed the evidence relating to state protection accordingly: see Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052 at para 14. The overall weighing of the evidence bearing on risk to the applicant in Mexico and the availability of effective recourse was th......
  • Contreras Luevano v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 1467
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • December 23, 2021
    ...(Magonza v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 14 at paras 72, 75 (Magonza); Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052 at para 14). [25] I agree with the Principal Applicant that the officer failed to assess the operational ability of the Mexican authorities to ......
  • Zapata v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 1277
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • September 9, 2022
    ...it was reasonably open to the RAD to find that the Applicants had not met their burden (Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052 at para 19). (3) Conclusion [19] It is trite law that claimants must seek protection from their home state before going to a different country......
  • Rahman v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 516
    • Canada
    • Federal Court (Canada)
    • April 11, 2022
    ...adequacy of the protection, not merely the state’s efforts: see Giraldo v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2020 FC 1052, at para 14 (and the cases cited there); Moya v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2016 FC 315, [2016] 4 FCR 113, at paras 73, 78 and 80. The state’s......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT