Judgement for this Case: Click here!
IMMIGRATION — Refugee status — Procedure — Procedural fairness — Quality of interpretation — Refugee claimants were citizens of Croatia and Bosnia who alleged they had been persecuted in Bosnia because of their Catholic religion and persecuted in Croatia because of their Bosnian nationality — Board found that claimants lacked well-founded fear of persecution with nexus to Convention ground in Croatia — Board also found that they were not persons in need of protection as removal to Croatia would not subject them personally to risk of harm — Claimants applied for judicial review, contending that they had been denied procedural fairness due to quality of interpretation at hearing — Application dismissed — Claimant alleged that board decision was based on incorrect interpretation but claimant made no effort to tell court what mistakes in interpretation may have been made — Claimants placed no evidence before court that would establish any interpretation errors or impact they had upon decision — Such unsupported assertions tell court nothing it needs to know to assess this issue — This was bald assertion and bald assertion was not sufficient proof without detail and evidence to back it up — Onus was upon claimants to establish their case and claimants failed to establish any kind of case for interpretation problems — Accordingly, claimants had not established procedural unfairness as result of interpretation problems
