Federal Skilled Worker Class Action Lawsuit

[warmest]

even if I do eventually get Australian immigration, I still would love to go to Canada as both my parents (PR) and brother (citizen) are settled there. Lets see how it goes.

I just love it. Keep on rocking, dude. ;D

 

[noon]

Hi noon,
Thank you so much for the explanation. You are well informed, knowledgeable and resourceful. I believe, for sure, you will be a great asset to this forum.

I wonder how come CIC maintains programme integrity by processing these transferred files at London and Warsaw. I can hear people murmuring, "What is the point in talking about 'programme integrity' when the integrity of CIC itself is debatable and is of grave concern?" My concern and sympathy are for those applicants of Islamabad and Damascus.

By the way, what do you think Justice Barnes will do in the near future regarding our litigation? Are you a part of Tim's litigation or class action lawsuit?

What is your plan B, if our litigation fails? (This is a hypothetical question that I am asking you. I am not at all doubtful about the success of our litigations. I am actually confident that Justice Barnes or, for that matter, any judge will only rule against CIC becasue CIC is on the wrong side.)

Thanks once again.

Hi warmest,
I must say Damascus and Islamabad applicants benefitted from the file transfer. After the file transfer Islamabad cases up to dec 2004 were finalised by London visa office. Damascus 2006 queue is now moving according to the information from another thread in this forum. Here it should be noted that as per www.cic.data there were no cases in Damascus that passed the selection criteria stage. So how can 2006 get MR and visa? The answer is that www.cic.data was extracted from caips and for primitive cases caips code for seldec was not entered in caips note. Same is the case with New delhi. So these Damascus files were physically verified once again recently and processed further.

I want to speak my thoughts here regarding Justice Barne's decision .I read some where in one of the Tims reply that Justice Barnes does not want /wish(I dont remember the correct word, but the meaning is some what nearer) to rule against the Minister. If you read between the lines it does mean that Tims litigation is already won but the Judge does not want to rule against CIC due to political or diplomatic reasons so the case is lagging on. What going behind the scenes could be Justice Barnes advising CIC to reverse its decision. CIC is in a fix as well as the minister because if the decision is reversed it will damage the ministers political carrer. Dont forget that till date none got refunded because he is a pre feb applicant. CIC also devised other measures last week to select provincial nominees from the existing pool of backlog. But I think the Class action suit is more important than Tims litigation because it covers the unassesed applicants also.

I applied through a consultant and my consultant was the one who supplied about 600+litigants to TIM. When my consultant asked me to join litigation I doubted their capability because they could do nothing in my case for these long years and I did not join. I also saw that after they filed litigation against CIC there was raids at their head ofiice and some problems with their good standing membership also.But in another litigation the committee of consultants won against CIC . If I want to join a litigation it can do done through my consultant only.

If the litigation fails in Canadian court, we should think twice before immigrating to Canada and spending our future life especially our kids future in a country where laws are made by a single individual and those laws which are prima facie injustice are supported by courts just because those blunders(laws) were made by a powerful politician.

 

[warmest]

Hi warmest,
I must say Damascus and Islamabad applicants benefitted from the file transfer. After the file transfer Islamabad cases up to dec 2004 were finalised by London visa office. Damascus 2006 queue is now moving according to the information from another thread in this forum. Here it should be noted that as per www.cic.data there were no cases in Damascus that passed the selection criteria stage. So how can 2006 get MR and visa? The answer is that www.cic.data was extracted from caips and for primitive cases caips code for seldec was not entered in caips note. Same is the case with New delhi. So these Damascus files were physically verified once again recently and processed further.

I want to speak my thoughts here regarding Justice Barne's decision .I read some where in one of the Tims reply that Justice Barnes does not want /wish(I dont remember the correct word, but the meaning is some what nearer) to rule against the Minister. If you read between the lines it does mean that Tims litigation is already won but the Judge does not want to rule against CIC due to political or diplomatic reasons so the case is lagging on. What going behind the scenes could be Justice Barnes advising CIC to reverse its decision. CIC is in a fix as well as the minister because if the decision is reversed it will damage the ministers political carrer. Dont forget that till date none got refunded because he is a pre feb applicant. CIC also devised other measures last week to select provincial nominees from the existing pool of backlog. But I think the Class action suit is more important than Tims litigation because it covers the unassesed applicants also.

I applied through a consultant and my consultant was the one who supplied about 600+litigants to TIM. When my consultant asked me to join litigation I doubted their capability because they could do nothing in my case for these long years and I did not join. I also saw that after they filed litigation against CIC there was raids at their head ofiice and some problems with their good standing membership also.But in another litigation the committee of consultants won against CIC . If I want to join a litigation it can do done through my consultant only.

If the litigation fails in Canadian court, we should think twice before immigrating to Canada and spending our future life especially our kids future in a country where laws are made by a single individual and those laws which are prima facie injustice are supported by courts just because those blunders(laws) were made by a powerful politician.

Hi noon,

First of all, I would like to comment on your timeline. Just now I got to see your timeline. Your application was filed on 28 July 2004 (28-07-2004). I don't know how to call it: “shocked'? or “amazed”?

“Shocked” because by next week you will be completing 100 months of waiting in the queue (a century of a different sort, which is not a matter to be proud of by anybody). Shame on you CIC. Shame! Shame! What an achievement by CIC, for all the wrong reasons? Shame on you CIC. How are you (Canada) going to save your face amongst the comity of nations? The entire world is looking down upon you (Canada). If at all you (CIC) have any self-esteem, I would first request you (CIC) do a self-introspection.

“Amazed” because you (noon) have great patience and perseverance (for being steadfast and not giving up even during testing times). I admire you (noon) for these qualities in you. I am reminded of the saying “Tough times do not last long, but tough people do.”. You are amazing noon. Keep it up.

Regarding your thoughts in your posting, I have a lot to say. I will keep on posting whenever I could find spare time. Right now, I am at my office and have got some urgent work to do. Sorry for that.

 

[hopeful4]

hallo warmest
thank you warmest for all the time you took to write these useful posts.
Concerning the settlement with CIC: There are 42 litigants of Tim whose files were assessed before 29th of March 2012 and who joined the litigation after the 14th of June. For this small group Tim almost finalized an agreement with CIC to grant them visa within 300 days. However, when the consent orders were being drafted,,,Tim noticed that some wordings of the agreement can allow CIC to elongate the process with no guarantee of the timeline. CIC refused to negotiate further and so the agreement failed.

If you remember, this is the group which Tim posted the below update about in unfaircic
30 October 2012

Immigration agreed to resume processing on files of the pre-BIll C-50 litigants whose files had been assessed before March 29th, to do so on a priority basis and to issue the visas once the file is visa-ready but, in any event, before the end of August, absent extenuating circumstances.

 

[wounderful]

Hi warmest,
I must say Damascus and Islamabad applicants benefitted from the file transfer. After the file transfer Islamabad cases up to dec 2004 were finalised by London visa office.

Dear Noon:

I agree and sorry for you as I think you are among one of the most waited people in Pre-2008. I am July 2005 applicant.

 

[wounderful]

Hi warmest ,
Islamabad applications were transferred to London due to security reasons .That happened when Bin laden was captured and CIC suspected security problems in Islamabad. Just like that Damascus applications were transferred to Warsaw when war broke out in Syria. Islamabad VO is not closed for ever because passports of applicants are to be send to the Islamabad vO for visa stamping. 66 cases in Islamabad VO are those cases that crossed all stages of visa processing in Islamabad VO itself before the transfer of applications to London but were not finalised because of many reasons.

Well even I am Islamabad Applicant I was not aware of that fact before. Thank you Noon.

 

[hopeful4]

Hallo everyone ,,,can you look at this calculation and tell me if I am right?
Kenny Jason has stated several times that the current backlog will be cleared by the end of 2014. Yet in the light of the announced visa levels for 2013 this does not seem to be realistic. The current pre 2008 backlog is about 20,000. Adding to this the backlog of the later systems (post feb 2008, post june 2010) which is 80,000 , the total will be 100,000 immigrants in backlog.

On the other hand the number of visas to be granted in 2013 is 53, 000-55,000 and ,assuming the same number for 2014, there will be a maximum of 110,000 visas granted by the end of 2014. This means that the minister has only the space of 10,000 visas to grant to the new applicants beginning from 2013. Will he really grant this tiny number to the new applicants (who have been always his privileged group)?. My conclusion is that he will actually give a much larger number of the 110,000 visas to the new applicants, making the finishing of the backlog by the end of 2014 unrealistic unless he plans to actually eliminate more old applications in the forthcoming budget bills,,,,,
So do you think that Kenny will eliminate more of the pre 2008 applications?

 

[bishista1]

What are the Top 5 Countries in the World for Quality of Life?

We take a closer look at the pros and cons of the top 5 countries that have been named the best for expatriates seeking quality of life abroad by the latest NatWest survey

If you have a choice about where you relocate to abroad, you may as well choose a nation famed for offering its residents a high standard of living and a decent quality of life. Which is why we thought we'd examine the top 5 countries for quality of life today, and see what the pros and cons of each are for expats.

We Brits are famous for being as at home abroad as we are at home, but part of our ease of integration comes from picking the right country to call home in the first place. Some Britons have to relocate to a given nation for employment, but the majority of us are free to roam and explore – so where should we be headed if we want to have a good standard of living overseas?

The Centre for Future Studies and NatWest International have released their latest Quality of Life Index, (although – note to the PR company responsible for promoting the Index - it is virtually IMPOSSIBLE to get hold of a copy), and according to their findings, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, France and America top the tables when it comes to the ‘lifestylie' on offer for expats! Therefore, read on to discover what's so good and what's perhaps not so good about each country in turn.

1) Living in Australia
In the 2010 Quality of Life Index Australia has moved up two places and knocked Canada off the number one spot; it becomes the best place for expats to live abroad if they really want the best lifestyle - according to the expatriates surveyed anyway.

The Pros - the reasons cited in Australia's favour by the expats surveyed range from the usual positives such as the climate and ease of integration, (thanks to language and cultural similarities), to the perhaps less well considered bonuses such as the fact that there are solid professional employment opportunities for those with the right skills in Australia, and that it is easy to own property in Australia as an expat, (69% of expats surveyed in Australia owned property there as opposed to an average of 31% worldwide).

The Cons - Australians are beginning to complain about their country's immigration policy as the ‘multicultural' card is played. Immigrants from non-Western/white/English speaking countries are moving in and integration is being ‘forced' on native Australians and some are finding it difficult to swallow. There is a real and growing sense of unease across all sectors of society – and as a result of this, any immigrant - even a Brit – is one more too many for some Australians. For Britons moving in the last thing they perhaps expect to face in Australia is a racial backlash, but this can be a reality for some.

Other than this, other negatives are the fact that Australia is so similar to the UK, but not on every level, so that some who opt for Australia because they think it will be wholly like home are disappointed. For others, they feel isolated being physically so far away from their friends and family.

2) Living in Canada
Canada was the number one nation for quality of life until Australia knocked it off the top spot this year...but it still has an awful lot to offer immigrants.

The Pros - Canada's inclusive immigration policy is a definite bonus for families wanting to settle in together because where one member of a family is seen as a potential asset and therefore worthy of a visa to move to live, work, invest or employ in Canada, other members of the family can apply for residency and to be sponsored by the original visa holder.

Canada actively works to keep families together – and this is seen as a real reason for why more immigrants manage to settle in to Canadian life easily. Other positives in the country's favour include the fact that its economy has not suffered in the same way ours has in the UK, and expats rank its housing standards and quality of the natural environment as strong positives in its favour.

The Cons - the Canadian weather has to be the number one downside for the majority of people! In addition, whilst the nation has a ‘good' immigration policy, it still requires dedication, money and even a lot of patience to get a residency visa.

3) Living in New Zealand
New Zealand is an exceptionally positive choice with Britons considering expatriation because it ticks an awful lot of very important boxes, it is also a country that always scores well in the NatWest International Quality of Life Index.

The Pros - New Zealand scores well with expatriates for its ease of integration, good health and education provision. As stated it is a favourite with Brits because it is just so easy to settle in on a lot of fundamental levels – i.e., many ‘native' Kiwis herald from the UK originally anyway, English is the most commonly spoken language, the systems in place for everything from government to law are similar or even the same as in the UK in most cases, and so it's easy to move in and get on with life seamlessly.

The Cons - New Zealand is like the UK on many levels, but it's like a UK of yesteryear in places as well! Elements of life and some locations across the nation are basic, even primitive, and there is a lack of sophistication when you step off the beaten track that some Britons really struggle to adapt to cope with. New Zealand is also very isolated, and it does not have the Australian climate either!

4) Living in France
France often tops polls when it comes to quality of life, and as we discussed in an article on Monday, there is an awful lot to be said in France's favour, particularly for expatriate Britons. However, as we also went on to further disclose, France is not perfect – which is why it's just outside the top 3 for NatWest's Quality of Life Index perhaps.

The Pros - the nation scores very well with Britons looking just at location factors. For example, it is cheaply, easily and swiftly accessible from all parts of the UK, you can access such a vast array of different climates and geographical delights in France too. France has a wealth of culture and history and it has a very good standard of education available. Property is still cheap in many regions and the cost of living can be a lot less than in the UK.

The Cons - You need to speak a decent standard of French to ever integrate successfully! What's more, racial tension is an issue in France as it is in Australia, (and many other nations besides), and Brits are immigrants as much as the next expat and so need to be aware of this! Healthcare in France is ok, but it suffers underfunding and Brits usually have to have insurance to top up their level of cover. France also perhaps suffers because many Brits have a rose tinted view of the country, and when they move in and realise it is not perfect they react against it strongly.

5) Living in America
America is really only ‘up there' on the index for professional expatriates, it is not a country considered by many retirees and it's also seen more as a temporary relocation destination rather than a permanent new home abroad by most expats surveyed.

The Pros - for those who have employment in America the pros include living in a nation where English is the number one language spoken, where ease of integration is easy for Brits as they are widely welcomed, where it's not so difficult to get a visa because you have secured employment, and where healthcare and educational facilities and standards are very high. Cost of living is relatively well accepted as well, and the entertainment options in American on offer for families are exceptionally good.

The Cons - America is a bit like Marmite – expats seem to either love it and thrive or hate and resent it! It can be very hard to get a visa and immigration officials are famed for their unpleasant handling of any visitor to America. Whilst many of the major cities are easy places to settle in as an immigrant, massive parts of America have real issue with ‘foreigners!' It can be hard to scrape below a surface that is suffused with fast food and cheap and nasty culture to find any ‘real' American culture and quality, (although it is possible and those who persevere can fall in love with this vast nation of contrasts.)

Health care is only good if you can afford it, and it is not a myth, ‘normal' Americans don't walk anywhere, the car really is king.

In Conclusion
All the countries considered as offering expatriates the best quality of life abroad have pros in their favour and cons going against them – this is simply because no one nation is perfect, and a choice about where you want to live abroad is always going to be wholly subjective! It's good to have indices such as the NatWest Quality of Life Index as they are based on broad opinion, and from broad opinion you can perhaps perceive which values and facts are important to you when you're looking for your ideal home overseas.

However, as has perhaps been a bit of a theme this week, one has to note that no one nation is perfect, and to find the best country in the world for you and your family you will have to do your own assessment and accept that there is no country that will tick all of your boxes!

http://www.shelteroffshore.com/index.php/living/more/top-5-countries-for-quality-of-life-10870

Thanks for info. Its worth reading.

 

[mdmm]

when visiting Australia a few months ago,my Australian host warned me not to travel to over 70% areas which were unsafe for any indian/south asians??
Please be realistic when making or grading countries,to live.

 

[hopeful4]

The posts of Warmest concerning Australia are really useful, but let us please concentrate on the main topic of this thread which is the class action,,,OK?

 

[jevan]

The posts of Warmest concerning Australia are really useful, but let us please concentrate on the main topic of this thread which is the class action,,,OK?

Yer,Agreed brother.warmest is a v valuable member of this forum but its a time to healup our grieves.Let us Pray to Almighty Allah that a good news come on 23rd of november.

 

[warmest]

These are the latest entries that could be found in IMM-8747-12 (YANJUN YIN).

2012-11-19
Order rendered by The Honourable Mr. Justice Barnes at Ottawa on 19-NOV-2012 granting the application for leave fixing the hearing at a Special Sitting at Toronto on 14-JAN-2013 to begin at 09:30 specifying documents to be produced and/or filed as follows: Tribunal to send its Record on or before a date to be determined; A to serve and file further aff on or before December 7, 2012; R to serve and file further aff on or before December 14, 2012; Cross-exams to be completed on or before December 21, 2012; A to serve and file further Memo on or before December 28, 2012; R to serve and file further Memo on or before January 7, 2013; and Transcript of cross-exams to be filed on or before January 7, 2013 Decision filed on 19-NOV-2012 Considered by the Court without personal appearance entered in J. & O. Book, volume 577 page(s) 146 - 148 Copy of the order sent to all parties Transmittal Letters placed on file.

2012-11-16
Book of Authorities consisting of 1 volume(s) on behalf of the applicant received on 16-NOV-2012

 

[wounderful]

These are the latest entries that could be found in IMM-8747-12 (YANJUN YIN).

2012-11-19
Order rendered by The Honourable Mr. Justice Barnes at Ottawa on 19-NOV-2012 granting the application for leave fixing the hearing at a Special Sitting at Toronto on 14-JAN-2013 to begin at 09:30 specifying documents to be produced and/or filed as follows: Tribunal to send its Record on or before a date to be determined; A to serve and file further aff on or before December 7, 2012; R to serve and file further aff on or before December 14, 2012; Cross-exams to be completed on or before December 21, 2012; A to serve and file further Memo on or before December 28, 2012; R to serve and file further Memo on or before January 7, 2013; and Transcript of cross-exams to be filed on or before January 7, 2013 Decision filed on 19-NOV-2012 Considered by the Court without personal appearance entered in J. & O. Book, volume 577 page(s) 146 - 148 Copy of the order sent to all parties Transmittal Letters placed on file.

2012-11-16
Book of Authorities consisting of 1 volume(s) on behalf of the applicant received on 16-NOV-2012

It that means leave is granted and now be heared further for decision on 14 Jan 2013 ?? I hope my understand is correct.

 

[warmest]

hallo warmest
thank you warmest for all the time you took to write these useful posts.
Concerning the settlement with CIC: There are 42 litigants of Tim whose files were assessed before 29th of March 2012 and who joined the litigation after the 14th of June. For this small group Tim almost finalized an agreement with CIC to grant them visa within 300 days. However, when the consent orders were being drafted,,,Tim noticed that some wordings of the agreement can allow CIC to elongate the process with no guarantee of the timeline. CIC refused to negotiate further and so the agreement failed.

If you remember, this is the group which Tim posted the below update about in unfaircic
30 October 2012

Immigration agreed to resume processing on files of the pre-BIll C-50 litigants whose files had been assessed before March 29th, to do so on a priority basis and to issue the visas once the file is visa-ready but, in any event, before the end of August, absent extenuating circumstances.

Thanks hopeful4. You are welcome.

 

[warmest]

Hallo everyone ,,,can you look at this calculation and tell me if I am right?
Kenny Jason has stated several times that the current backlog will be cleared by the end of 2014. Yet in the light of the announced visa levels for 2013 this does not seem to be realistic. The current pre 2008 backlog is about 20,000. Adding to this the backlog of the later systems (post feb 2008, post june 2010) which is 80,000 , the total will be 100,000 immigrants in backlog.

On the other hand the number of visas to be granted in 2013 is 53, 000-55,000 and ,assuming the same number for 2014, there will be a maximum of 110,000 visas granted by the end of 2014. This means that the minister has only the space of 10,000 visas to grant to the new applicants beginning from 2013. Will he really grant this tiny number to the new applicants (who have been always his privileged group)?. My conclusion is that he will actually give a much larger number of the 110,000 visas to the new applicants, making the finishing of the backlog by the end of 2014 unrealistic unless he plans to actually eliminate more old applications in the forthcoming budget bills,,,,,
So do you think that Kenny will eliminate more of the pre 2008 applications?

Is not the pre-Feb 2008 backlog alone around 100,000 (and it is around 86,000 according to Tim Leahy)? This number only denotes the number of applicants and it does not include the applicants' dependents (spouse and children, if any). Please refer to the data that I have presented in page 53 of this thread.

Please correct me if I am wrong.