Federal Skilled Worker Class Action Lawsuit
- Thread starter admin
- Start date
Dear eb_babak,
before finalizing letter / draft invite all (FEDERAL SKILLED WORKER APPLICANTS) whether ( LITIGANTS & NON LITIGANTS).
also invite people from China ( INVESTOR APPLICANTS).
SIR!
1
Believe me if we succeed in motivating & convincing CHINESE people to join our group,Iam quite sure ,they will put tremendous pressure on GOVT CANADA.
2
We should also invite applicants ( LITIGANTS & NON LITIGANTS),from INDIA,PAKISTAN, SRI LANKA, CHINA,SOUTH KOREA,TURKEY,SAUDI ARABIA,KUWAIT,UAE,QATAR, RUSSIA,etc to allow us include their names and file numbers for making draft / letter .
3
we should also invite applicants who,s applications were also rejected by Supreme Court of Canada.
4
we should send a copy of that to MP,s of Indian born Canadian and Pakistan born Canadian.
We need round about approximately 50000 applicants for that graft / letter.
SIR!
I am still confuse why not MP,s from Indian as well as from Pakistan speak a single word for us.
Regards
IMRAN KHAN JADOON
before finalizing letter / draft invite all (FEDERAL SKILLED WORKER APPLICANTS) whether ( LITIGANTS & NON LITIGANTS).
also invite people from China ( INVESTOR APPLICANTS).
SIR!
1
Believe me if we succeed in motivating & convincing CHINESE people to join our group,Iam quite sure ,they will put tremendous pressure on GOVT CANADA.
2
We should also invite applicants ( LITIGANTS & NON LITIGANTS),from INDIA,PAKISTAN, SRI LANKA, CHINA,SOUTH KOREA,TURKEY,SAUDI ARABIA,KUWAIT,UAE,QATAR, RUSSIA,etc to allow us include their names and file numbers for making draft / letter .
3
we should also invite applicants who,s applications were also rejected by Supreme Court of Canada.
4
we should send a copy of that to MP,s of Indian born Canadian and Pakistan born Canadian.
We need round about approximately 50000 applicants for that graft / letter.
SIR!
I am still confuse why not MP,s from Indian as well as from Pakistan speak a single word for us.
Regards
IMRAN KHAN JADOON
Friends,
It looks like there is something negative for us. The chance for Appeal also seems to be slimming. My feeling is because Mr. Tim used to update any developement, but even after so many request there is no response from him. If a person like him, who used to respond within minutes of writing e-mail is not responding means, there is some bad news waiting. Only God can save us. Please let us join together to protest at the places where we are. At least the world should know the injustice we met with.
It looks like there is something negative for us. The chance for Appeal also seems to be slimming. My feeling is because Mr. Tim used to update any developement, but even after so many request there is no response from him. If a person like him, who used to respond within minutes of writing e-mail is not responding means, there is some bad news waiting. Only God can save us. Please let us join together to protest at the places where we are. At least the world should know the injustice we met with.
Even if his good news is appeal means few more years and it doest government would follow judgment, they didn't follow judgment earlier for others.
Only if possible if government does it to salvage prestige of their court, and try to show that they are better then previous govt.
But need some pressure and attention to our issue to government.
Only if possible if government does it to salvage prestige of their court, and try to show that they are better then previous govt.
But need some pressure and attention to our issue to government.
Hi There,
This is Kiran and following is the my current situation please review and help me.
Currently I have 363 points and wailting in pool from past 5 months.
I am I.T guy working as JAVA Developer.
I have around one year experience(11-May-2014 to 9-May-2015) and currently in INDIA.
What are possible ways for me to get the PR?
I also heard about PNP, how to apply for the PNP program?
Please help me.
Thanks,
Kiran
This is Kiran and following is the my current situation please review and help me.
Currently I have 363 points and wailting in pool from past 5 months.
I am I.T guy working as JAVA Developer.
I have around one year experience(11-May-2014 to 9-May-2015) and currently in INDIA.
What are possible ways for me to get the PR?
I also heard about PNP, how to apply for the PNP program?
Please help me.
Thanks,
Kiran
New Tim´s letter. February 20,2016
Good day,
The last I wrote, I advised that we are now waiting for Justice Russell to decide whether to allow an appeal of his decision. The status has not changed since that date.
For that reason, those few of whom who insist on asking me updates have not received a reply because the answer to their question was given in my preceding email, and, they should know that, when there is news to report, I will report it. Those who ask "what's new", will not get a reply when there is nothing new.
Others, however, have expressed a serious misunderstanding of where we stand at this point. THE ENDS HAS NOT COME. So, please do not worry yourself about that, do not despair but, rather, "keep the faith".
Finally, I have attached Rocco's reply, to which -- at my request -- he attached requests DoJ had admitted I had made but which it claimed had been rejected -- and DoJ's reply, confirming that, contrary to what DoJ had stated in its response, my request that S25.1 be accessed to grant landing to each of you. If you read DoJ response, dated, 14 May 2013, you will see that no decision had been made as of that date to my request.
So, what is A25.2, you ask? Well, it is the fraternal twin to A25, wherein the Minister may grant permanent residence for humanitarian and compassionate reasons to anyone who asks. A25.2, on the other hand, is where the Minister on his own initiative grants landing "for reasons of public policy".
Both Justice Barnes, in December 2012, when he rejected my motion to enforce the Agreement and Justice Rennie in Tabingo said that, absent such a request, the Court could not order A25.2 be accessed to land the applicant. Therefore, after each such pronouncement, I made that request, which has yet to be decided.
Therefore, if Russell confirms his intellectual dishonesty by refusing to allow his decision to be appealed, we can ask the Court to order the current minister, who is not Jason the Magnificent, to act on our request. Yes, it would mean further litigation but it also means that our quest will not have come to an end if Russell bars an appeal.
I am sorry to have kept all of you hanging for so long but I only received these attachments 5:30pm Friday after repeatedly requesting them. Until I had read them, I could not tell you about the A25.2 request because DoJ's position did not square with my recollection. Now that I know that my recollection is correct, I can tell you. So, no, it is not yet over. Two paths remain: an appeal of Russell's decision and the request to the Minister to access s25.2 to grant you permanent residence.
Regards,
Tim
Good day,
The last I wrote, I advised that we are now waiting for Justice Russell to decide whether to allow an appeal of his decision. The status has not changed since that date.
For that reason, those few of whom who insist on asking me updates have not received a reply because the answer to their question was given in my preceding email, and, they should know that, when there is news to report, I will report it. Those who ask "what's new", will not get a reply when there is nothing new.
Others, however, have expressed a serious misunderstanding of where we stand at this point. THE ENDS HAS NOT COME. So, please do not worry yourself about that, do not despair but, rather, "keep the faith".
Finally, I have attached Rocco's reply, to which -- at my request -- he attached requests DoJ had admitted I had made but which it claimed had been rejected -- and DoJ's reply, confirming that, contrary to what DoJ had stated in its response, my request that S25.1 be accessed to grant landing to each of you. If you read DoJ response, dated, 14 May 2013, you will see that no decision had been made as of that date to my request.
So, what is A25.2, you ask? Well, it is the fraternal twin to A25, wherein the Minister may grant permanent residence for humanitarian and compassionate reasons to anyone who asks. A25.2, on the other hand, is where the Minister on his own initiative grants landing "for reasons of public policy".
Both Justice Barnes, in December 2012, when he rejected my motion to enforce the Agreement and Justice Rennie in Tabingo said that, absent such a request, the Court could not order A25.2 be accessed to land the applicant. Therefore, after each such pronouncement, I made that request, which has yet to be decided.
Therefore, if Russell confirms his intellectual dishonesty by refusing to allow his decision to be appealed, we can ask the Court to order the current minister, who is not Jason the Magnificent, to act on our request. Yes, it would mean further litigation but it also means that our quest will not have come to an end if Russell bars an appeal.
I am sorry to have kept all of you hanging for so long but I only received these attachments 5:30pm Friday after repeatedly requesting them. Until I had read them, I could not tell you about the A25.2 request because DoJ's position did not square with my recollection. Now that I know that my recollection is correct, I can tell you. So, no, it is not yet over. Two paths remain: an appeal of Russell's decision and the request to the Minister to access s25.2 to grant you permanent residence.
Regards,
Tim
QUOTE FROM TIM LETTER
Finally, I have attached Rocco's reply, to which -- at my request -- he attached requests DoJ had admitted I had made but which it claimed had been rejected -- and DoJ's reply, confirming that, contrary to what DoJ had stated in its response, my request that S25.1 be accessed to grant landing to each of you. If you read DoJ response, dated, 14 May 2013, you will see that no decision had been made as of that date to my request.
So, what is A25.2, you ask? Well, it is the fraternal twin to A25, wherein the Minister may grant permanent residence for humanitarian and compassionate reasons to anyone who asks. A25.2, on the other hand, is where the Minister on his own initiative grants landing "for reasons of public policy".
Could you please tell me is this section A 25.2 is also applicable to us , I mean for NON LITIGANTS.
Regards
Imran Khan Jadoon
EMAIL imrankhanjadoonca@hotmail.com
Finally, I have attached Rocco's reply, to which -- at my request -- he attached requests DoJ had admitted I had made but which it claimed had been rejected -- and DoJ's reply, confirming that, contrary to what DoJ had stated in its response, my request that S25.1 be accessed to grant landing to each of you. If you read DoJ response, dated, 14 May 2013, you will see that no decision had been made as of that date to my request.
So, what is A25.2, you ask? Well, it is the fraternal twin to A25, wherein the Minister may grant permanent residence for humanitarian and compassionate reasons to anyone who asks. A25.2, on the other hand, is where the Minister on his own initiative grants landing "for reasons of public policy".
Could you please tell me is this section A 25.2 is also applicable to us , I mean for NON LITIGANTS.
Regards
Imran Khan Jadoon
EMAIL imrankhanjadoonca@hotmail.com
Any Law or its section is applicable only to Litigants.But i want justice should be done with everyone whether litigants or Non-Litigants. Non-Litignats have to take seperate path by reaching out to Prime minister of Canada or Immigration Minister, requesting them to have a relook at Bill c-38,section 87.4. Until this bill/section is not revoked, no relief can be expected by Non-Litigants.IMRANKHANJADOON said:
Note: By Non-Litignats i mean anyone who has taken back his application fees, has accepted the court verdict on Bill C-38, Section 87.4.
From: Tim Leahy <TEL@unfairCIC.com>
Date: October 13, 2012 9:46:54 PM GMT+05:30
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: CIC refund procedure.
Good day,
CIC has now released the refund procedure. See the following links:
Fortunately the form (second link) does not require you (a) to request the refund, (b) to concede that you accept the closing of your file or (c) to sign the form (unless you want the cheque paid to someone other than the principal applicant). Instead, it is only asking for information from you. My advice, therefore, is that you complete and hit the "send" button.
It generally takes CIC two months to issue a cheque. So, I would not expect to see the cheque arrive promptly. It is only when you cash the cheque that you need to be cautious. Examine the cheque before cashing it. If it contains anything whereby you agree to the cancellation of your file, cross it off and initial the cross-off. Above your signature write:
cashed under protest
I still want [file number] processed
[signature]
In the event that the unfairCIC.com litigation -- or the s. 87.4 ligation -- is successful or CIC reverses course owing to our litigation (or the litigation in general), CIC will have to prove that you cashed the cheque. The only way to do so is to provide a copy of the endorsement on the back of the cheque, which will show that you cashed the cheque under protest.
If Justice Barnes ever gets around to writing his reasons for denying the injunction, if he is reasonably honest, he will include in his reasons his claim that, should the litigation succeed, those who have cashed the cheques may resurrect their file by repaying the amount. Likewise, a court order to that effect may be included when the litigation has finally runs its course.
The alternative would be holding the cheque until the litigation has run its course, by which time the cheque may well be stale-dated, requiring you to request a replacement, which action would take months and months and months. So, you might as well cash it, rather, than (a) allowing CIC to continue earning interest on your money or (b) having to go through the hassle of having it replaced if our litigation fails. Just be sure not to sign anything saying that you have agreed to the closing of your file.
Regards,
Tim
Date: October 13, 2012 9:46:54 PM GMT+05:30
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: CIC refund procedure.
Good day,
CIC has now released the refund procedure. See the following links:
Fortunately the form (second link) does not require you (a) to request the refund, (b) to concede that you accept the closing of your file or (c) to sign the form (unless you want the cheque paid to someone other than the principal applicant). Instead, it is only asking for information from you. My advice, therefore, is that you complete and hit the "send" button.
It generally takes CIC two months to issue a cheque. So, I would not expect to see the cheque arrive promptly. It is only when you cash the cheque that you need to be cautious. Examine the cheque before cashing it. If it contains anything whereby you agree to the cancellation of your file, cross it off and initial the cross-off. Above your signature write:
cashed under protest
I still want [file number] processed
[signature]
In the event that the unfairCIC.com litigation -- or the s. 87.4 ligation -- is successful or CIC reverses course owing to our litigation (or the litigation in general), CIC will have to prove that you cashed the cheque. The only way to do so is to provide a copy of the endorsement on the back of the cheque, which will show that you cashed the cheque under protest.
If Justice Barnes ever gets around to writing his reasons for denying the injunction, if he is reasonably honest, he will include in his reasons his claim that, should the litigation succeed, those who have cashed the cheques may resurrect their file by repaying the amount. Likewise, a court order to that effect may be included when the litigation has finally runs its course.
The alternative would be holding the cheque until the litigation has run its course, by which time the cheque may well be stale-dated, requiring you to request a replacement, which action would take months and months and months. So, you might as well cash it, rather, than (a) allowing CIC to continue earning interest on your money or (b) having to go through the hassle of having it replaced if our litigation fails. Just be sure not to sign anything saying that you have agreed to the closing of your file.
Regards,
Tim
csaona said:
Unfortunately, the end has come long before the appeal was filed. It was (THE END) there even when the initial litigation was filed and that is why i elected not to be part of this litigation and try to seek other ways to obtain my PR status (and which i did, as many others). I understand that it might not been possible for others to do so and clinging to this litigation and subsequent appeals may been the only way to get PR.
But, this litigation, the first appeal and the NEW appeal Mr. Leahy is talking about is just a way to provide more false hope for litigants AND most importantly to make more money for the lawyers out of it.
You need to understand, no matter how hard it is to do so, that the decision will not be overturned. Try to think about it from the perspective of government and justice system, allowing the appeal will be to admit that the government did wrong, thus opening the door for more appeals and potentially for all 300K cases to be reopened. More courts, more appeals, more processing of unwanted applications. Realistically, it is impossible for government to do so or for CIC to process. Canadian law is an English law system, and as such it is not necessarily based on justice but on the law AND the applicability of its decisions, i.e. it will always rule in a way of the best workable solution, not necessarily the just and true one. It is what it is.
Liberal government is not going to help anyone, it wants to look it is more open to immigration and wants to help "poor immigrants" but those are just empty words and promises. If you think otherwise, just look at their election campaign promises and compare it to what they are going to implement with regards to the Citizenship Act. Same here, they will do minimal "cosmetical" changes to look good without changing the system or provide real solutions to the problems at hand. That's the truth.
I hope this post does not offend anyone, like i mentioned I was affected by this backlog purge myself which delayed my PR by over 3 years, but i was lucky to get it in other way through Canadian Experience Class. I wish the same to you.
It means that Canadian justice system (Courts, lawers and judges) are not for ensuring justice for those whom it has been denied, but are feasibility study centers who will decide based on the possibility to implement. So is it a business house like arrangement? How could we call it as a developmed modern system?sashali78 said: