Search results

I think they smell their defeat. ;D ;)

In all situation it is win win for you so do not worry and ask your MR reffering you're CAIPS notes date, and directly with case specIfic enquiry.

What I think that our lawyers (all of them) took an easy approach to claim just CCRP to win for all, and now it turn to be a very diffecult and become a challange to claim that. Once it is decided it must be appealed by either party as it has long lasting effects in future. And at one point may...

Here is some relivant example. How, A decision by CIC to refuse the application can be challanged in Court by a person not live inside Canada, (there are so many decisions set aside by the court and sent back to different Officer) Why not, A decision by CIC to refuse the application to...

I think we should consider the fact that few FSW litignat are already in Canada. Should it still not applicable ?

Below is the latest update from Counsel Leahy Good day, As some of you have noted, Justice Rennie has directed counsel involved in challenging the the closure of the FSW files to address the issue of whether the Charter (Bill of Rights) applies to those not residing in Canada. Written...

from the other forum it is found that there are three kind of applicants 1. Applicants with Ecase "In Process" 2. Applicants with Ecase "Blank" 3. Applicants with Ecase "Not Accessable" Can any one comments what will be the reason behind it ? I belong to No. 2

It is recently updated.

If our win based only on natural justice, it will turn down very easily in the appeal. But if based on CCRF it will not so easy to turn down.

Now in simple words, if there were any reported cases on it earlier, we will win, otherwise, it will be a challenge to prove by all our learned lawyers.

If I would be the Judge I have asked this in the very beginning even before granting any AFL. Just not to waste time and money of all.

Mine is blank. Nothing shows in status.

Dear members, From this below email received from LVO, I understand how difficult to respond where you have to reply but you do not wanted to in such complex situation such as our (Pre-2008). I pray that we and CIC will come out from this, with clear instructions from the Court. And let die...

I hope the next week will be our lucky week. :D

Same here

Moreover, do you come a cross with a background check where the person call and says that due to quality control this conversation will be recorded. Bearing in mind he did not mentioned that it is verification call as it is just a random survey.

That's why we can't see his arrows. LOL

Dear Qorax: Can you further clarify whats that means "eligibility clearnace" is it means backgroud check is completed and now the applicant is requested for updates of documents ? and than medical request ?

Dear Warmest: Can you shed some light or if you have asked Tim that while he was not part of Jan 14-16, 2013 hearing what is the status of his applicants and what kind of proceeding he will do apart from it. He was filing so many motions what are the status of them.

Well if it is so, what about lawyers who informed us they have successfully obtained stay for upto three months and therein after court did not extend it. So in my opinion if your comments is correct the date should be 14th September 2012 and not June 14th. Lets see what will be in the Judgement.