That’s not true. IRCC picks randomly files, IRCC, sometimes, doesn’t even check the date [of the file]. That has nothing to do with a pseudo complexity. I was talking about STARTING the process, not finishing the process. CQFD.
That’s unfair and I’m pretty sure -like our lawyer said- that the Court will disapprove this typical behaviour.
Ps. And my whole previous message about IRCC is, obviously, sarcastic. But, like I said, everything that I’m talking about is the starting process. I talked to an ex-agent of IRCC, and yes, it’s not an open secret that agents pick randomly files. One day of difference is considered unfair in our society (perhaps not by the Court) so imagine 1 or 2 months (or more) of difference (and that can be problematic, legally).
Please, feel free to take it to court. I think it has very low chances of any meaningful success - redress that applicants may be looking for - but there's always some lawyer who wants a new boat.
I think it's fairly clear that prior to covid, the order in which the very first stage (AOR/data entry) was done was fairly close to the order in which they arrived. Not a 100% direct first-come, first-served - there are steps with outside agencies like provinces that can get hung up - but it was reasonably close.
Since then, their system has clearly broken down. "Random" - I don't know - as actually I think the signs are that they have established separate teams dealing with apps received before roughly November, and those after. Those received after are getting relatively quick, those before are beginning to catch up - which to me indicates that 'older files' are a mess and they are close to physically digging them out.
And that crucially, they've determined (perhaps mistakenly) that throwing more bodies at the backlog from before is a waste of resources. (There are physical constraints that mean 3X more people for example will not fix it). And that it is NOT more equitable to delay all files (including yours as a later stage) to 'dig things out' from the first group.
So: perhaps 'unfairly' but no first come first served.
Will a court 'disapprove?' Perhaps. That doesn't matter. What matters is whether the court could (in fact) or would order meaningful redress. I'm skeptical - but if you've got the money to fund a legal challenge, there's a boat out there waiting to have your name painted on it.
Even if there were 'redress' at the AOR stage - would it matter? Because after AOR, it most obviously is not first-come, first-served.
And you've ignored the point that any comparison to the quota-driven, capped (and now defunct for precisely these reasons) investor's immigration programme is a fool's errand. The 'fundamental principle of justice' the court identified there clearly was relevant to
that programme - and very much not to others.
But hey, go for it. I might note, however, this point: the case you cited was an applicant for immigration who was suing
six years after his file started processing. And his writ of mandamus was denied - and it was denied
not because he'd been waiting too long - but because if the writ was granted, he would have received an
unjust benefit (due to principle of first-come, first-served) compared to all the people that were ahead of him.
Not to speculate too openly - but has it occurred to you that in your case, that would mean waiting until all of the applicants before you (and there are many) got handled in order?
Talk about grasping defeat from the jaws of victory.
[In case not obvious to anyone: I still think these are horrific delays and an embarrassment to Canada. But however bad that may be, that doesn't mean that all arguments or comments from those who are frustrated make sense, are truthful, or have any reasonable prospect of legal victory.]
