家庭旅馆 国内机票版 海运专栏 房版

87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

87.4适用的范围,在这个移民法写的很清楚了,就是2001年11月1日到2008年2月27日,所有联邦技术移民申请,2012年3月29之前未完成初审,也就是Caips没有打分的人。

所以说,87.4一刀切不是91专享的法律,2001年11月1号没有91政策的吧。被一刀切的8.5万个案件,28万人,大部分都是91以前的旧政。

87.3,在这个移民法也规定得很详细,适用于除了28万人以外的所有类别,包括投资,团聚,其他类别的技术移民等等所有自2001年11月1号以来的移民申请。
:wdb37::wdb17:
"87.4一刀切不是91专享的法律,2001年11月1号没有91政策的吧.". 是说2001年11月1日至2008.2.27期间,没此条87.4?
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

87.4适用的范围,在这个移民法写的很清楚了,就是2001年11月1日到2008年2月27日,所有联邦技术移民申请,2012年3月29之前未完成初审,也就是Caips没有打分的人。

所以说,87.4一刀切不是91专享的法律,2001年11月1号没有91政策的吧。被一刀切的8.5万个案件,28万人,大部分都是91以前的旧政。

87.3,在这个移民法也规定得很详细,适用于除了28万人以外的所有类别,包括投资,团聚,其他类别的技术移民等等所有自2001年11月1号以来的移民申请。
:wdb37:

“2012年3月29之前未完成初审,也就是Caips没有打分的人。”。好像是2012年前打过分但没结案的人,都切,属于OB442范围。
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

:wdb37::wdb17:
"87.4一刀切不是91专享的法律,2001年11月1号没有91政策的吧.". 是说2001年11月1日至2008.2.27期间,没此条87.4?



看到这个法案的大标题下面的Assented to 2001-11-01吗?

本质上,这部最新修订的移民法就是一部回溯的法律。所有现存的移民积案,无论哪种类别的,都不可避免受到直接影响。

还有人固执的认为87.4一刀切是91专用的,动脑筋想一想,从2006年9月1日到2008年2月26日这短短18个月,加拿大各使馆收到了28万人的联邦技术移民申请吗?

其实91在香港的积压,比05-06年旧政的积压少得多。91执行之前的那个季度,旧政3个月提交的量,相当于07年的91大半年的量。
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

:wdb37:

“2012年3月29之前未完成初审,也就是Caips没有打分的人。”。好像是2012年前打过分但没结案的人,都切,属于OB442范围。


2012年是个很大的范围,2012年3月29之前打分的和之后打分的完全是两种待遇了。

被OB442停审的人,是在3月29之后selection decision的,当然是被一刀切的。完全符合87.4. OB442本身无法律漏洞。
 
最后编辑: 2012-10-12
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

2012年是个很大的范围,2012年3月29之前打分的和之后打分的完全是两种待遇了。

被OB442停审的人,是在3月29之后打分(ME)的,当然是被一刀切的。完全符合87.4. OB442本身无法律漏洞。

如果是3月29日之前打分,但ME是3月29之后发的,是什么情况呢?谢谢!
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

329前打分的,当然就是在329之前完成了slection decision,就不属于一刀切87.4的范围了。

87.4规定的一刀切的标准,不是有没有ME,而是有没有在329前完成selection decision
谢谢回复!还有个问题是,打分是否等于Selection decision?谢谢!
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

谢谢回复!还有个问题是,打分是否等于Selection decision?谢谢!

这是最近伦敦使馆给被切的申请人的标准回复:

The Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act became law on June 29, 2012. Under this legislation, Federal Skilled Worker (FSW) applications made before February 27, 2008 were terminated by operation of law if a decision based on FSW program selection criteria had not been made by an immigration officer before March 29, 2012.

Upon review of your application, it appears that a selection decision was not made before March 29, 2012, and that your application has been terminated by operation of law. No further action should be taken on your part. You will be contacted regarding next steps at a later date.

For more information on the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act please refer to the Citizenship and Immigration website at:http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/notices/notice-qa.asp.

CIC will return fees paid to the Department, without interest, for applications that are eliminated under the provisions in Bill C-38. CIC is currently finalizing the fee return process, which will involve confirming up-to-date contact and payee information.


Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act 就是C38法案的全称
 
最后编辑: 2012-10-12
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

已经打分并不等同于完成了Slection Decision,是两码事。北京使馆有已经打分但是没有做Slection Decision的例子,不多几个。

3.29以前如果CAIPS里包含以下两点,目前不会被C38切掉:
1.明确的分值,超过67分;
2.SELEC项为1或者4,而不是0;或者VO有记录语句明确说了符合条件;

原文:
Q3. What does a decision based on Federal Skilled Worker selection criteria mean?

A decision based on Federal Skilled Worker selection criteria means that an immigration officer:
  • has assessed your FSW application against the points grid, and
  • has made a decision on whether or not you meet the selection criteria of the program.
Currently, the pass mark is 67 points out of a grid worth 100 points. The grid considers the following:
  • the person’s ability in English and/or French;
  • their education;
  • their work experience;
  • their age;
  • whether they have a job already arranged in Canada (arranged employment); and
  • how well they might adapt to living in Canada (which awards points for things like previous work or study in Canada, spouse’s education and relatives in Canada).
If your application is successful, you would move to the next phase (i.e. admissibility). At that point you would be checked against health, security and criminality requirements before a final decision is made and a visa is issued or not.
If you do not score at least 67 on the FSW points grid, your application would be refused and CIC would inform you of the decision.
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

对,Caips在329前打分了,就是在329前完成了slection decision.

这是最近伦敦使馆给被切的申请人的标准回复:

The Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act became law on June 29, 2012. Under this legislation, Federal Skilled Worker (FSW) applications made before February 27, 2008 were terminated by operation of law if a decision based on FSW program selection criteria had not been made by an immigration officer before March 29, 2012.

Upon review of your application, it appears that a selection decision was not made before March 29, 2012, and that your application has been terminated by operation of law. No further action should be taken on your part. You will be contacted regarding next steps at a later date.

For more information on the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act please refer to the Citizenship and Immigration website at:http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/notices/notice-qa.asp.

CIC will return fees paid to the Department, without interest, for applications that are eliminated under the provisions in Bill C-38. CIC is currently finalizing the fee return process, which will involve confirming up-to-date contact and payee information.


Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act 就是C38法案的全称
非常感谢这么及时的回复!我的情况是Caips在329前打分了,但selection decision日期填的是6月份发ME的日期,不知道是个什么情况,我是香港91前旧政的。
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

非常感谢这么及时的回复!我的情况是Caips在329前打分了,但selection decision日期填的是6月份发ME的日期,不知道是个什么情况,我是香港91前旧政的。


你的Caips打分和Selection decision给出的时间竟然相差这么大,理论上,6月给的selection decision,当然就是在329之后,那就是要被切了。

这个情况感觉很复杂。直接给香港发邮件问吧:

re-canadaimmig.hkong@international.gc.ca

到底在329之前有没有得到selection decision,VO给的回复才是最准确的。87.4就是以VO有没有对申请人的案子在329前完成评估来衡量是否一刀切:

87.4 (1) An application by a foreign national for a permanent resident visa as a member of the prescribed class of federal skilled workers that was made before February 27, 2008 is terminated if, before March 29, 2012, it has not been established by an officer, in accordance with the regulations, whether the applicant meets the selection criteria and other requirements applicable to that class.
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

已经打分并不等同于完成了Slection Decision,是两码事。北京使馆有已经打分但是没有做Slection Decision的例子,不多几个。

3.29以前如果CAIPS里包含以下两点,目前不会被C38切掉:
1.明确的分值,超过67分;
2.SELEC项为1或者4,而不是0;或者VO有记录语句明确说了符合条件;

原文:
Q3. What does a decision based on Federal Skilled Worker selection criteria mean?





A decision based on Federal Skilled Worker selection criteria means that an immigration officer:
  • has assessed your FSW application against the points grid, and
  • has made a decision on whether or not you meet the selection criteria of the program.
Currently, the pass mark is 67 points out of a grid worth 100 points. The grid considers the following:
  • the person’s ability in English and/or French;
  • their education;
  • their work experience;
  • their age;
  • whether they have a job already arranged in Canada (arranged employment); and
  • how well they might adapt to living in Canada (which awards points for things like previous work or study in Canada, spouse’s education and relatives in Canada).
If your application is successful, you would move to the next phase (i.e. admissibility). At that point you would be checked against health, security and criminality requirements before a final decision is made and a visa is issued or not.
If you do not score at least 67 on the FSW points grid, your application would be refused and CIC would inform you of the decision.

这样看来, Caips打分和Selection decision的时间不是同步的。在329前caips有打分,但没有selection decision的,肯定要被切。这种情况实在很可惜。
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

The Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act became law on June 29, 2012. Under this legislation, Federal Skilled Worker (FSW) applications made before February 27, 2008 were terminated by operation of law if a decision based on FSW program selection criteria had not been made by an immigration officer before March 29, 2012.

Upon review of your application, it appears that a selection decision was not made before March 29, 2012, and that your application has been terminated by operation of law. No further action should be taken on your part. You will be contacted regarding next steps at a later date.

For more information on the Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act please refer to the Citizenship and Immigration website at:http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/department/media/notices/notice-qa.asp.

CIC will return fees paid to the Department, without interest, for applications that are eliminated under the provisions in Bill C-38. CIC is currently finalizing the fee return process, which will involve confirming up-to-date contact and payee information.


Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act 就是C38法案的全称

伦敦VO给的这封标准答复,措辞用语完全是律师的指导。他给的标准就是有没有selection decision,而不是caips有没有打分。

terminated by operation of law这一句最霸道,申请人被法律停掉,而不是部长停掉。这样的措辞,灵感就是来自Justice Barnes五月份对Tim的禁制令否决的判决书:

As I read the proposed legislation, the Minister has no
residual role or discretion with respect to the affected
files. Those files are simply terminated by operation of
law. (Barnes, J.)
Datta v. M.C.l.2012FC 626, at para. 10

CIC的律师把Justice Barnes的原话拿出来就是抓到了尚方宝剑,因为那是法官说的,是绝无可能被推翻的真理了。
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

你的Caips打分和Selection decision给出的时间竟然相差这么大,理论上,6月给的selection decision,当然就是在329之后,那就是要被切了。

这个情况感觉很复杂。直接给香港发邮件问吧:

re-canadaimmig.hkong@international.gc.ca

到底在329之前有没有得到selection decision,VO给的回复才是最准确的。87.4就是以VO有没有对申请人的案子在329前完成评估来衡量是否一刀切:

87.4 (1) An application by a foreign national for a permanent resident visa as a member of the prescribed class of federal skilled workers that was made before February 27, 2008 is terminated if, before March 29, 2012, it has not been established by an officer, in accordance with the regulations, whether the applicant meets the selection criteria and other requirements applicable to that class.

非常感谢!
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

再来看看为什么CIC的律师不断不打自招强调二月协议。表面上,它是要以遵守协议的名义不承认6月14之后加进来的人,其实更重要的是,它抓住这个协议就能威慑其他正在告它的律师。

CIC的律师开口不离协议,就是为了让其他律师知道,如果万一法官把参加Tim的放了,也不代表别的律师马上能摘桃子,因为CIC和别的律师没签过此类协议!

判例法已经不适用了,因为C38的通过就是一个分水岭,在这之前的判决对之后的官司不能适用。C38之前的开庭,完全不用告C38,因为当时不存在C38。但C38已经通过了,任何官司必须首先告C38违宪。

所有其他正在告CIC的律师都在虎视眈眈的注视着法官如何对Tim的635人和614以后的600多人作出安排,他们就等着法官放635或者1200,或者一个不放,依此来对起诉策略做出相应的调整。

可是这个法官偏偏不作任何处理,让那些律师利用不了Tim的成果。可以大胆想象,CIC串通法官,要求法官在集体诉讼成案之前不对Tim的635人作任何安排,给那些律师的诉讼增加难度。



关于Tim的诉讼对其他律师的诉讼和集体诉讼的影响,我上面的帖子只说到了问题的一个方面,还有另一面需要说明。

CIC想利用Tim的协议来否定其他律师,这只是CIC单方面的如意算盘,别的律师自然有办法接招,如果他们被这个吓退了,那还叫律师吗?

无论法官放Tim的635人还是1200人,对其他律师的策略都有很大的帮助,增添他们的胜算。

如果法官彻底否决了Tim的所有人,对其他律师也是帮大忙。因为这意味着Tim的团体被拖进了其他律师联合的诉讼,相当于2003年集体诉讼里的Dragon,对整体的诉讼还是加分的因素。

所以说,Tim的诉讼无论得到什么样的结果,对集体诉讼都是利。因此,参加Tim的无论是635人还是1200人,都不需要惦记别人会不会被切,参加别的律师的,更无需对Tim有什么抱怨。

至于无论什么诉讼都没参加,对任何形式的诉讼都不看好的人,直接给CIC写邮件要求撤案退费好了,一了百了,从此无需纠结移民这件事了。
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

加拿大并不能算真正的三权独立, 立法和行政基本一体了, CIC提的法案,保守党的天下都能通过, 等于没有分权了. 司法相对独立, 如果也偏袒CIC, 那等于是保守党独裁了,


真心不希望这个观点被证实。现在有迹象表明Justice Barnes这个保守党的法官的integrity有问题。他9月18号在渥太华联邦法庭信誓旦旦的说CIC退费不代表诉讼的终结,只要诉讼赢了,申请人能再交申请费。现在CIC的退费方案已经出台了,9月18开庭到现在也快一个月了,这个法官还没有用书面判决的形式固定他在法庭上说的话。

6月5开庭的法官Rennie也是保守党人,是他让当天的开庭出现胜诉,现在又轮到法官Barnes来对motion做最后判决,是不是可以理解成一个人做好人一个人做坏人来混淆视听呢?
 
回复: 87.4对诉讼的影响 87.3对所有移民积案的影响

不同的法官对同一个案子审理可能有完全相反的结果,比如台湾陈水扁案,开始由台北地方法院周占春法官宣判无罪,舆论哗然,后改由蔡守训法官审理获判重罪。法官的个人素质和价值取向可能决定案子的结果。
 

注册或登录来发表评论

您必须是注册会员才可以发表评论

注册帐号

注册帐号. 太容易了!

登录

已有帐号? 在这里登录.

Similar threads

顶部