AGRON ZOGU VJOLLCA ZOGU (A.K.A. VIOLLCA KAPLLANI) CINDY ZOGU ARVOJOLA ZOGU Applicants v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND, 2011 FC 32

Federal Court Cour fédérale Date: 20110112 Docket: IMM-2558-10 Citation: 2011 FC 32 Toronto, Ontario , January 12, 2011 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Hughes BETWEEN: AGRON ZOGU VJOLLCA ZOGU (A.K.A. VIOLLCA KAPLLANI) CINDY ZOGU ARVOJOLA ZOGU Applicants and THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT [ 1 ] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada dated April 16, 2010 denying the Applicants​ claim for refugee protection in Canada .

I am dismissing this application. [ 2 ] The Applicants are a husband, wife and their two children. The husband and wife are Albanian citizens, they left Albania and entered into the United States illegally. Their two children were born in the United States and are citizens of that country. The Applicants instituted asylum claims in the United States which were rejected. The Applicants then entered Canada and made a refugee claim. That claim was rejected by the decision at issue.

[3] First, there is no dispute that the refugee claim made by the two children, who are United States citizens, were properlyrejected. [4] The basis of the refugee claims made by the husband and wife rested on the evidence of the husband and certain documents.The Member hearing the matter found the husband not to be a credible or trustworthy witness and one who embellished the evidence tobolster the claim. The Member further found certain documents to be false or suspect.

These are matters within the jurisdiction of theMember to determine and, while not unassailable, on an application such as this the Applicants bear a heavy burden in rebutting suchfindings (Culinescu v. Canada (FC), 136 F.T.R. 241).

Notwithstanding the able efforts of Counsel for the Applicants,I find that the Applicants have not satisfied the burden of displacing those findings. [5] Similarly, with respect to an internal flight alternative I find that the Applicants did not lead sufficient evidence at thehearing before the Member to displace the presumption that such an alternative is available. [6] In the result the application is dismissed. There is no question for certification. JUDGMENT THE COURT ADJUDGES that: 1. The application is dismissed; 2. There is no question for certification; 3. No Order as to costs. ​Roger T.

Hughes​ Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKETS: IMM-2558-10 STYLE OF CAUSE: AGRON ZOGU, VJOLLCA ZOGU (A.K.A. VIOLLCA KAPLLANI), CINDY ZOGU,ARVOJOLA ZOGU v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario DATES OF HEARING: January 12, 2011 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT: HUGHES J. DATED: January 12, 2011 APPEARANCES : Ronald Shacter FOR THE APPLICANTS Rafina Rasheed FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Ronald Shacter Barrister & Solicitor Toronto, ON FOR THE APPLICANTS Myles J. Kirvan Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT