Federal Skilled Worker Class Action Lawsuit

[warmest]

Hi thephilanthropist,


The Minister can set instructions that permit him to return some applications without processing them at all, and thus obviously there is no further duty in respect of those applications. This is about C-50 cases.

.However, for those that are determined eligible for processing, the duty to do so in a reasonably timely manner remains, absent clear legislative language extinguishing that duty.This is about pre C-50 cases or pre feb 2008 cases which were given AOR and are in process


It is important here to remember that
1)the bifurcation of applications in to c-50 and pre c-50 was done on nov 2008 by passing of bill c-50.
2)Justice rennie's decision was given on june 14 2012 before sec 87.4 was made law .
3)The case was against CIC's delay in processing.At that time no applications were terminated . J. Rennie gave verdict for both Liang (pre C-50) and Phul maya gurung (C-50) in a single decision. The decision analyses both c-50 and pre c-50 cases together. Liang (pre c-50) was won while Phul maya gurung(c-50) was defeated.

That is right, noon. Some people here are confused because some others are here to intentionally confuse them. Thanks to Jason Kenney for sending such people (trouble makers) here to this forum to confuse some of our people. These trouble makers are neither litigants nor applicants and they have no idea about our permanent residence application process or our litigation. Please ignore them.

 

[warmest]

Instead of playing Nostradamus why can't everybody wait for the 14th – 16th of Jan 2013? Let us read what the Federal Court of a Canada has to say. Let see if Jason Kenney is really Lord Almighty.
CIC HAS TO PROCESS ALL THE FILES THEY RECEIVED IN THE SYSTEM. The delay in processing is because of the incompetence, laziness and intentional warehousing of the files. There are no Back loggers but actually Warehoused files. I hope you guys know the difference. There will be accountability, and all affected applicants have to ensure it.

Well said. ;D

One can hear the sound of the bells of the temple elephant even before it arrives. Likewise, your words sound to me as a precursor of the eagerly expected court judgement. ;D

 

[warmest]

they ARE doing their job as lawyers.

they would be "Heroes" if they are doing it for free.

If there is no money involved, do you think this group of lawyers would stand together and fight against the Canadian government on their own for free?? Ofcourse not

No free meals. No beggars.
Don't make others beggars. Let them live with dignity. ;D

 

[warmest]

The summery of changes which Kenny introduced in one year left me speechless ,,,,,,regardless of how strict and unfair these new rules are,,,how can immigration officers, offices keep up with all these new changes?,,,,

This man has made the life of millions of people round the world worse by making coming and settling in Canada harder ,,,,I only pray that what he does is in the favor of Canadian themselves, because otherwise he will be the only beneficiary of his insane "reforms"!

Well said. I love it.

 

[warmest]

hey guys.. need help.

I have joined the litigation too in August 2012. I just checked my online status and now it shows 'Decision Made'

I thot the file wont be closed until the litigation cases reach a judgement.
pls let me know what is happening.. confused ???

Thanks to Jason Kenney.

 

[warmest]

CIC has made just one entry in E Cas Status in 8 years I. E. DM. Now wait for another 8 years to be processed\Refund letter. Haa Haa. Shame to cic.

Well said Gaber1. I too join you in saying "Shame on you CIC". ;D

 

[warmest]

it is helpful to put things in perspective. there is not one person involved in the decision to shelve or do away with the pre feb 2008 Canadian PR applications. First is there is the Conservative Government leading a policy change in Canadian immigration. Second, there is the Canadian Parliament. Policy changes are, most often, painful for those affected. One important and valid question is the process of changing policies. Some are seen as unfair; others are questioned in court for legal basis. It will further help us if we stay sober and look at our FSW application in nuanced ways. Surely there are many who are emotionally affected by these policy changes. We stay hopeful for the positive outcome of our litigation, even as we prepare ourselves for an adverse outcome. We move on from their and continue to live our lives as meaningfully as we could even if our dreams for new life in Canada are dashed to the ground.

I love this positive attitude of yours, sac.

 

[warmest]

Some of the people lost their mind and business and follow this forum without any interest so keenly. You may see some of them who has time to waste, they are not even applicant but comments a lot about each and every positive posting so negatively.

I can understand your feelings. Don't take those trouble makers seriously. Just ignore them. Continue to be positive and be happy. ;D

 

[Knight_Crusader]

Some of the people lost their mind and business and follow this forum without any interest so keenly. You may see some of them who has time to waste, they are not even applicant but comments a lot about each and every positive posting so negatively.

I think that's what public forums are for...

 

[warmest]

I think that's what public forums are for...

No, this forum is not meant for general public. This is not a public toilet. It is actually meant for those who would consider immigrating to Canada. This is certainly not a place for anti-social elements, time-passers and sadists.

 

[Knight_Crusader]

No, this forum is not meant for general public. This is not a public toilet. It is actually meant for those who would consider immigrating to Canada. This is certainly not a place for anti-social elements, time-passers and sadists.

what i meant was, forum open to public which this is . anyways, i know what you mean..
everybody here is expressing their views/opinion ...

 

[sashali78]

The problem with this specific topic in this forum is that about ~50% of comments in it have nothing to do with neither immigration or litigation issues but a personal war between two notorious members who tend to reply to as many posts as they can, whether response is required or not. Let it be informative or amusing I would not mind, but unfortunately it has long passed a limit of good taste and is nothing but a common spam.

 

[thephilanthropist]

Dear Members,

I would like to post my analysis based on common sense and general work principle.

Stage 1: First of all law s. 87.4 was introduced in omnibus budget bill on 29-Mar-2012 and royal assent was received on 29-Jun-2012.

Stage 2: CIC published the Operational bulletin 442 on 29-Jun-2012 for cessation.
A general guidance was given to Visa post in this bulletin. (Link: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob442.asp).

Stage 3: CIC published the Operational bulletin 442C on 12-Oct-2012 for Return of Fees. A manual review for application was to be done and deadline was 30-Nov-2012. If we consider that all Visa Post has completed the manual review and sent the files NHQ, Ottawa.
(Link: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob442C.asp)

Stage 4: After receiving the files CIC updated its online database for application status.

Now, it would be of No meaning that CIC updates half of the database and still half left out because I believe that updation of the database is single shot automatic updation. Hence those with In Process will be processed and regretfully those with Decision made will get refund of the fees. Further to support this argument, only those with PSDEC positive and total points above 67 are kept in process.

Regarding SELDEC as said earlier also that CAIPS system was designed when most of the applicants were required to be interviewed. But, after most of the applicant are not interviewed hence for those applicants whose interview are waived SELDEC is not recorded.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/evaluation/fswp/section1.asp

Disclaimer: Above stated are my views only and solely analysed based on the forum inputs. Any further comments are welcomed.

 

[hopeful4]

I am very glad that the official site of CIC admits the following:
Competing priorities and reduced visa targets. From 2002 to 2008, the minimum visa target for the FSWP decreased from about 116,000 to 67,000 visas. Applications received under the PNP, the Quebec skilled worker program and the Ministerial Instructions are given priority within the economic class, which often limits the ability to process IRPA applications received before Ministerial Instructions were introduced. Lowering the visa targets for the FSWP limits the ability of a CVOA to reduce its backlog.

 

[Sujman]

Dear Members,

I would like to post my analysis based on common sense and general work principle.

Stage 1: First of all law s. 87.4 was introduced in omnibus budget bill on 29-Mar-2012 and royal assent was received on 29-Jun-2012.

Stage 2: CIC published the Operational bulletin 442 on 29-Jun-2012 for cessation.
A general guidance was given to Visa post in this bulletin. (Link: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob442.asp).

Stage 3: CIC published the Operational bulletin 442C on 12-Oct-2012 for Return of Fees. A manual review for application was to be done and deadline was 30-Nov-2012. If we consider that all Visa Post has completed the manual review and sent the files NHQ, Ottawa.
(Link: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/bulletins/2012/ob442C.asp)

Stage 4: After receiving the files CIC updated its online database for application status.

Now, it would be of No meaning that CIC updates half of the database and still half left out because I believe that updation of the database is single shot automatic updation. Hence those with In Process will be processed and regretfully those with Decision made will get refund of the fees. Further to support this argument, only those with PSDEC positive and total points above 67 are kept in process.

Regarding SELDEC as said earlier also that CAIPS system was designed when most of the applicants were required to be interviewed. But, after most of the applicant are not interviewed hence for those applicants whose interview are waived SELDEC is not recorded.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/evaluation/fswp/section1.asp

Disclaimer: Above stated are my views only and solely analysed based on the forum inputs. Any further comments are welcomed.

I applied to CHC Colombo in Dec 2007. My PSDEC is 1 and scored 73 pionts. Did medicals in Jan 2012, but my case is terminated by CIC on 2nd Nov. due to operation of law after doing the manual review. I am going to join with litigation this week before lawyers close their litigation groups. I received my CAIPS in last wek hence the delay caused to join with litigation as I wanted to get clear information first.