Federal Skilled Worker Class Action Lawsuit

[j.sohi]

Please check your CAIPS carefully. On pages 2,3,4 and afterwards also some remarks given about the missing documents. What are those?

Hi badal
I checked carefully nothing is there.

 

[parker24]

Tuyen brother if you are a human being than plz be positive and correct yourself because if you heart someone feelings and if someone disappoint or get hurt by your comments than its not good for you because at the day of Judgement you have accountable in front of God for all you have done in this world. so I suggest you that no time is over now you have time to correct yourself and be positive and be good hearted with every human being its my request from you otherwise its your wish to broke any one heart or hurt any one by your negative comments.

Normally I would say something as a Christian, but before I even attempt to, I want to say this. Religion is a VERY VERY TOUCHY subject with many different religions going on on this board. I would NOT press this.

 

[Aquila]

Normally I would say something as a Christian, but before I even attempt to, I want to say this. Religion is a VERY VERY TOUCHY subject with many different religions going on on this board. I would NOT press this.

I agree with parker24.

@umerrais79
This is not a religious debate. Please keep your religious believes to yourself.

 

[marie_786]

Dear . so what i can do ? plz guide

i have initiate my immigration as FSW in 2009 under NOC 0111. i have receive the letter from london office to complete all documents as per provided checklist before 4 months of that letter. all required documents of my spouse , mine and my children are forwarded to them with in time frame. but unluckily last year i have receive letter from england office that my case has been rejected and send us acknowledgement with bank account details for refund of processing fee on dated 29th may 2012. my all original academic documents are at england office even my case has been rejected since last 9 months.

i have send several e-mails to them to return my documents but till to date i have not got my all documents. what i can do in that scenario now. please guide me as my future is on steak .

Regards

 

[noon]

@marie_786

Try to visit London visa office and ask for your originals . Show them the letters received from them. I have seen in this forum many applicants going to New delhi visa office (busiest visa office) to collect back their passports with or without visa when their passports are held beyond a reasonable period of time for visa stamping. It will work more easily with London visa office.

 

[avijitsg]

Quote for UnfairCIC ( http://www.unfaircic.com/status.html )

Justice Rennie directed counsel to address by February 22nd whether the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms covers non-Canadians residing abroad. Replies are due March 1st. Thus, no decision from the January 14th-16th hearing will be released until mid-March at the earliest. While the delay is disappointing, the fact that Justice Rennie has asked the question implies that he is prepared to declare s. 87.4 unlawful provided the Charter applies

In his previous capacity as a DoJ lawyer, Justice Rennie wrote an article on this issue. It may be found at:http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/sclr/article/viewFile/34832/31636

The article notes that the Supreme Court of Canada has found that the Charter applies extraterritoriality where a Canadian is involved and that lower courts have ruled that that finding limits application of the Charter to (a) Canadian abroad or (b) foreigners in Canada. However, the Supreme Court has never ruled that it does not apply to non-Canadians abroad because such a case has not reached it. It did, however, decline to overturn a ruling to that effect where the action itself occurred outside of Canada to non-Canada where Canadian officials were tangential actors in actions foreign national conducted; i.e., US officials at Guantánamo. In this case, the action occurred in Canada, the perpetrators are exclusively Canadian and application of the Charter will not impinge on the sovereignty of any foreign government. Furthermore, at the end of the article, Justice Rennie (before he was justice) noted that the European Court of Human Rights has observed that international law recognizes the extraterritorial law within the confines of a nation's diplomatic mission; i.e., Canadian law may be applied with respect to what occurs within a Canadian embassy or high commission.

Therefore, it would appear that (a) the immigrant visa applicants have Charter rights with respect to the closing of the FSW files because the action occurred in Canada and was applied within a Canadian diplomatic mission and (b) its application will not impinge on any foreign government's sovereignty. However, because the Supreme Court of Canada has not ruled on this issue, the litigation may well reach the Supreme Court of Canada.

Unquote

Please share what is ur views.
Thanks

 

[sbernados]

Quote for UnfairCIC ( http://www.unfaircic.com/status.html )

Justice Rennie directed counsel to address by February 22nd whether the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms covers non-Canadians residing abroad. Replies are due March 1st. Thus, no decision from the January 14th-16th hearing will be released until mid-March at the earliest. While the delay is disappointing, the fact that Justice Rennie has asked the question implies that he is prepared to declare s. 87.4 unlawful provided the Charter applies

In his previous capacity as a DoJ lawyer, Justice Rennie wrote an article on this issue. It may be found at:http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/sclr/article/viewFile/34832/31636

The article notes that the Supreme Court of Canada has found that the Charter applies extraterritoriality where a Canadian is involved and that lower courts have ruled that that finding limits application of the Charter to (a) Canadian abroad or (b) foreigners in Canada. However, the Supreme Court has never ruled that it does not apply to non-Canadians abroad because such a case has not reached it. It did, however, decline to overturn a ruling to that effect where the action itself occurred outside of Canada to non-Canada where Canadian officials were tangential actors in actions foreign national conducted; i.e., US officials at Guantánamo. In this case, the action occurred in Canada, the perpetrators are exclusively Canadian and application of the Charter will not impinge on the sovereignty of any foreign government. Furthermore, at the end of the article, Justice Rennie (before he was justice) noted that the European Court of Human Rights has observed that international law recognizes the extraterritorial law within the confines of a nation's diplomatic mission; i.e., Canadian law may be applied with respect to what occurs within a Canadian embassy or high commission.

Therefore, it would appear that (a) the immigrant visa applicants have Charter rights with respect to the closing of the FSW files because the action occurred in Canada and was applied within a Canadian diplomatic mission and (b) its application will not impinge on any foreign government's sovereignty. However, because the Supreme Court of Canada has not ruled on this issue, the litigation may well reach the Supreme Court of Canada.

Unquote

Please share what is ur views.
Thanks

This is so confusing.

​

 

[PMM]

Hi

Quote for UnfairCIC ( http://www.unfaircic.com/status.html )

Justice Rennie directed counsel to address by February 22nd whether the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms covers non-Canadians residing abroad. Replies are due March 1st. Thus, no decision from the January 14th-16th hearing will be released until mid-March at the earliest. While the delay is disappointing, the fact that Justice Rennie has asked the question implies that he is prepared to declare s. 87.4 unlawful provided the Charter applies

In his previous capacity as a DoJ lawyer, Justice Rennie wrote an article on this issue. It may be found at:http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/sclr/article/viewFile/34832/31636

The article notes that the Supreme Court of Canada has found that the Charter applies extraterritoriality where a Canadian is involved and that lower courts have ruled that that finding limits application of the Charter to (a) Canadian abroad or (b) foreigners in Canada. However, the Supreme Court has never ruled that it does not apply to non-Canadians abroad because such a case has not reached it. It did, however, decline to overturn a ruling to that effect where the action itself occurred outside of Canada to non-Canada where Canadian officials were tangential actors in actions foreign national conducted; i.e., US officials at Guantánamo. In this case, the action occurred in Canada, the perpetrators are exclusively Canadian and application of the Charter will not impinge on the sovereignty of any foreign government. Furthermore, at the end of the article, Justice Rennie (before he was justice) noted that the European Court of Human Rights has observed that international law recognizes the extraterritorial law within the confines of a nation's diplomatic mission; i.e., Canadian law may be applied with respect to what occurs within a Canadian embassy or high commission.

Therefore, it would appear that (a) the immigrant visa applicants have Charter rights with respect to the closing of the FSW files because the action occurred in Canada and was applied within a Canadian diplomatic mission and (b) its application will not impinge on any foreign government's sovereignty. However, because the Supreme Court of Canada has not ruled on this issue, the litigation may well reach the Supreme Court of Canada.

Unquote

Please share what is ur views.
Thanks

1. IMHO, grasping at straws.

 

[anthello]

whats ur status now

In Process

 

[Badal789]

In Process

Please get your CAIPS note.

 

[can88da]

Quote for UnfairCIC ( http://www.unfaircic.com/status.html )

Justice Rennie directed counsel to address by February 22nd whether the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms covers non-Canadians residing abroad. Replies are due March 1st. Thus, no decision from the January 14th-16th hearing will be released until mid-March at the earliest. While the delay is disappointing, the fact that Justice Rennie has asked the question implies that he is prepared to declare s. 87.4 unlawful provided the Charter applies

In his previous capacity as a DoJ lawyer, Justice Rennie wrote an article on this issue. It may be found at:http://pi.library.yorku.ca/ojs/index.php/sclr/article/viewFile/34832/31636

The article notes that the Supreme Court of Canada has found that the Charter applies extraterritoriality where a Canadian is involved and that lower courts have ruled that that finding limits application of the Charter to (a) Canadian abroad or (b) foreigners in Canada. However, the Supreme Court has never ruled that it does not apply to non-Canadians abroad because such a case has not reached it. It did, however, decline to overturn a ruling to that effect where the action itself occurred outside of Canada to non-Canada where Canadian officials were tangential actors in actions foreign national conducted; i.e., US officials at Guantánamo. In this case, the action occurred in Canada, the perpetrators are exclusively Canadian and application of the Charter will not impinge on the sovereignty of any foreign government. Furthermore, at the end of the article, Justice Rennie (before he was justice) noted that the European Court of Human Rights has observed that international law recognizes the extraterritorial law within the confines of a nation's diplomatic mission; i.e., Canadian law may be applied with respect to what occurs within a Canadian embassy or high commission.

Therefore, it would appear that (a) the immigrant visa applicants have Charter rights with respect to the closing of the FSW files because the action occurred in Canada and was applied within a Canadian diplomatic mission and (b) its application will not impinge on any foreign government's sovereignty. However, because the Supreme Court of Canada has not ruled on this issue, the litigation may well reach the Supreme Court of Canada.

Unquote

Please share what is ur views.
Thanks

Frankly the answer to the question whether

"Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms covers non-Canadians residing abroad"

is No (in my personal opinion). The Charter only applies to Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada.

As for the second part

Canadian law may be applied with respect to what occurs within a Canadian embassy or high commission.

yes we do have grievance that our files were not processed as quickly as files of other applicants were processed from other parts of the world and for that the respective Canadian embassies and the Canadian government should be taken to task.

Overall the points mentioned in the paragraph above are very "tricky" in legal terms.

 

[moochops]

Frankly the answer to the question whether

is No (in my personal opinion). The Charter only applies to Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada.

As for the second part

yes we do have grievance that our files were not processed as quickly as files of other applicants were processed from other parts of the world and for that the respective Canadian embassies and the Canadian government should be taken to task.

Overall the points mentioned in the paragraph above are very "tricky" in legal terms.

Thats very shaky ground that you are implying there has been some form of discrimination. It is not CIC's fault that some of the applicants in these cases are from countries where fraud is higher than others, and therefore more stringent background checks need to be conducted.

Don't blame CIC, blame all those that tried to dupe the sytem before you.

To even attempt to suggest that there is discrimination involved is clutching at straws though is a standard last ditch attempt.

 

[can88da]

Thats very shaky ground that you are implying there has been some form of discrimination. It is not CIC's fault that some of the applicants in these cases are from countries where fraud is higher than others, and therefore more stringent background checks need to be conducted.

Where did you get this fact that "fraud is higher than others"? Do you have some proof? As for my point, please go to CIC website and go to the page where they show processing times for different regions and countries. You will find that countries like Pakistan and India have the highest processing times.

 

[sk540]

Hi

I've applied in Oct 2006. Earlier my status was "In Process" now i am getting the following message. Can any one Guide me please.


We were not able to identify you using the information you provided. There could be three possible reasons:

Please be sure the information you entered is correct and then try again.
This service is only available to clients with applications in process. We may have received your application but not begun processing it yet. The following link may help you determine if your application is being processed:
Application Processing Times
At this time, you may use this on-line service if you have:
sponsored a member of the family class;
applied for permanent residence from within or outside Canada;
applied for a permanent resident card (replacement or renewal);
applied for Canadian citizenship (grant of citizenship);
applied for Canadian citizenship for a person adopted by a Canadian citizen (on or after January 1, 1947);
applied for a citizenship certificate (proof of Canadian citizenship);
applied to renounce Canadian citizenship; or
applied to resume Canadian citizenship.

 

[can88da]

@sk540, your case has been terminated according to the Budget Act 2012. CIC is now going to refund your money.