败诉了吗？

[清晨的森林]

回复: 败诉了吗？

刚收到王律师的消息：
dear all
[FONT='Courier New', courier, monaco, monospace, sans-serif]the news is indeed bad we lost all counsel lost their cases before justice rennie[/font]
[FONT='Courier New', courier, monaco, monospace, sans-serif]but we do have a right to appeal[/font]
[FONT='Courier New', courier, monaco, monospace, sans-serif][/font]

为什么粘帖过来后，加了中括号的内容？

 

[昆虫国际]

回复: 败诉了吗？

上诉是否还需要另缴纳费用？有人知道吗？

 

[sandflower]

回复: 败诉了吗？

失望。无语

 

[清晨的森林]

回复: 败诉了吗？

新立案，肯定要费的。前面的案子已经结了。

 

[昆虫国际]

回复: 败诉了吗？

新立案，肯定要费的。前面的案子已经结了。

交了钱，没准还是这个结果。而王律师只是说我们又这个权力，呵呵。我也有权力给康胖子和哈珀写信，呵呵，于事无补。

 

[清晨的森林]

回复: 败诉了吗？

尘埃落定。不要难受。
上帝让我不要移民，不移民的生活于我就是最好的。

 

[appollon]

回复: 败诉了吗？

人权辩护有天然缺陷，还是回到追溯违宪吧。

 

[法国裁缝]

回复: 败诉了吗？

人权辩护有天然缺陷，还是回到追溯违宪吧。

 

[appollon]

回复: 败诉了吗？

我要上诉的，希望大家都坚持下来。。。。。。

 

[baoerjin]

回复: 败诉了吗？

建议大家仔细阅读一下判决书，其实里面反映了很多问题。

如下是我关注的两部分，感觉不太好。说句粗话，麻痹这判决书好像是CIC律师起草的一般，更像是CIC的辩护状。

[44] While I accept that the applicants have incurred various expenses in making their FSW
applications this is not equivalent to a deprivation of property. Rather, the applicants have freely
chosen to apply to come to Canada and to incur the related expense. Their FSW application did not
provide any right to, or recognizable legal interest in, the potential future economic opportunities
that might come their way if they were successful. At best, the applicants possessed a mere chance
to gain access to economic opportunities in Canada. No economic right had vested and any
opportunity remained prospective, contingent and speculative. In sum, a pending FSW application
does not constitute property within the meaning of subsection 1(a) of the Bill of Rights. Even if it
was considered property, the Bill of Rights does not prevent the expropriation of property without
compensation by the passage of unambiguous legislation.

[62] As a threshold issue, there is the question whether the applicants, as non-citizens residing
outside of Canada, are entitled to the protection of the Charter. This question is one of application
of the Charter, and not to be confused or conflated in its analysis with that of standing. The
applicants are “directly affected” by the passage of Bill C-38, as to have sufficient legal interest to
commence the applications. Whether the Charter applies or extends to non-residents is a discrete
legal question.

 

[rose201109]

回复: 败诉了吗？

有谁知道上诉的话需花多少钱，如果不太多的话继续上诉，走到这一步了就坚持到底

 

[chaoszr]

回复: 败诉了吗？

建议大家仔细阅读一下判决书，其实里面反映了很多问题。

如下是我关注的两部分，感觉不太好。说句粗话，麻痹这判决书好像是CIC律师起草的一般，更像是CIC的辩护状。

[44] While I accept that the applicants have incurred various expenses in making their FSW
applications this is not equivalent to a deprivation of property. Rather, the applicants have freely
chosen to apply to come to Canada and to incur the related expense. Their FSW application did not
provide any right to, or recognizable legal interest in, the potential future economic opportunities
that might come their way if they were successful. At best, the applicants possessed a mere chance
to gain access to economic opportunities in Canada. No economic right had vested and any
opportunity remained prospective, contingent and speculative. In sum, a pending FSW application
does not constitute property within the meaning of subsection 1(a) of the Bill of Rights. Even if it
was considered property, the Bill of Rights does not prevent the expropriation of property without
compensation by the passage of unambiguous legislation.

[62] As a threshold issue, there is the question whether the applicants, as non-citizens residing
outside of Canada, are entitled to the protection of the Charter. This question is one of application
of the Charter, and not to be confused or conflated in its analysis with that of standing. The
applicants are “directly affected” by the passage of Bill C-38, as to have sufficient legal interest to
commence the applications. Whether the Charter applies or extends to non-residents is a discrete
legal question.

前几段还有几句人话，就Life, Liberty and Security of the Person这段的辩护词伦尼大法官自己说着不害臊吗？好像都是申请人活该的样子。

 

[昆虫国际]

回复: 败诉了吗？

前几段还有几句人话，就Life, Liberty and Security of the Person这段的辩护词伦尼大法官自己说着不害臊吗？好像都是申请人活该的样子。

这狗屁法官就是一个SB

 

[fresh10]

回复: 败诉了吗？

有谁知道上诉的话需花多少钱，如果不太多的话继续上诉，走到这一步了就坚持到底

Waldman给出的价钱是$150.

 

[rose201109]

回复: 败诉了吗？

Waldman给出的价钱是$150.

好的，谢谢

 

[昆虫国际]

回复: 败诉了吗？

Waldman给出的价钱是$150.

请问如何联系？如何打款？

 

[luo-ai-wen]

回复: 败诉了吗？

请问如何联系？如何打款？

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: 败诉了吗？

没收到TIM的邮件，但根据bellissimo的档案记录，的确是dismiss了

 

[Les Paradis]

回复: 败诉了吗？

大家应该注意到了：

败诉的消息和CIC的技术移民新政细则同时出台。


这绝对不是巧合。


CIC等败诉后才发布新政，这个败诉很大可能就是CIC操纵的。

 

[smilon]

回复: 败诉了吗？

没收到TIM的邮件，但根据bellissimo的档案记录，的确是dismiss了

很高兴能够看到你的消息，有些担心。
we may lose our litigation, but the Canada lose its souls