不解释，原文如下：
no mediation
Good day,
An hour ago, CIC's counsel notified the Court (and us) that CIC "respectfully declines the proposal for mediation given that the parties' respective positions are not amenable to mediate at this time". Mr. Gold continued with: "We are, however, open to discuss options for an approach to case management".
The latter comment puzzles me somewhat because I understood that we had already agreed to go forward with representative cases from each of the two classes and each of the visa posts involved. Presumably, Mr. Gold wants the approach contained in a direction from the Court.
While an agreement to mediate had its advantage; viz., that CIC, if acting in good faith, was willing to work out a mechanism for processing the litigants' files; the disadvantage was that it precluding seeking damages while the mediation was taking place. Therefore, we are back to where we were at the beginning of the litigation; i.e., a two-front attack (a) seeking an order to have the files processed and (b) damages for having broken the agreement to process the files within the time-frame CIC had stated when the applications were initiated.
I will respond by sending a letter to the Court seeking confirmation of how we will proceed from here and the time-line for doing so. The Court's Christmas Break runs from December 20th to January 8th. So, I do not know whether we will get a response before January 8th.
We currently comprise 447 litigants, and I have 99 more to file. A lawyer in Montréal advised me today that she has filed 100 files and has 100 more on hand. (When she filed her cases, the Federal Court alerted her to our cases. Thus, perhaps Mr. Gold's case management comment referred to including her files and ours in the case-managed group.)
Regards,
Tim
no mediation
Good day,
An hour ago, CIC's counsel notified the Court (and us) that CIC "respectfully declines the proposal for mediation given that the parties' respective positions are not amenable to mediate at this time". Mr. Gold continued with: "We are, however, open to discuss options for an approach to case management".
The latter comment puzzles me somewhat because I understood that we had already agreed to go forward with representative cases from each of the two classes and each of the visa posts involved. Presumably, Mr. Gold wants the approach contained in a direction from the Court.
While an agreement to mediate had its advantage; viz., that CIC, if acting in good faith, was willing to work out a mechanism for processing the litigants' files; the disadvantage was that it precluding seeking damages while the mediation was taking place. Therefore, we are back to where we were at the beginning of the litigation; i.e., a two-front attack (a) seeking an order to have the files processed and (b) damages for having broken the agreement to process the files within the time-frame CIC had stated when the applications were initiated.
I will respond by sending a letter to the Court seeking confirmation of how we will proceed from here and the time-line for doing so. The Court's Christmas Break runs from December 20th to January 8th. So, I do not know whether we will get a response before January 8th.
We currently comprise 447 litigants, and I have 99 more to file. A lawyer in Montréal advised me today that she has filed 100 files and has 100 more on hand. (When she filed her cases, the Federal Court alerted her to our cases. Thus, perhaps Mr. Gold's case management comment referred to including her files and ours in the case-managed group.)
Regards,
Tim
