An IRB member ruled in my fiancée's favour on the charge of her working illegally in Canada.
The official reason in brief is that the minister did not meet its burden. It was clear listening to his concluding remarks that the member had concluded the CBSA to have been completely negligent in the collection and corroboration of evidence even to the point of seeming to try to suppress the presentation of evidence.
Given that my fiancée was just on a travel visa that will expire soon, the member mentioned that in principle the CBSA could appeal his ruling but that it is highly unlikely sinse she'll be leaving soon anyway (since we were planning on marrying and then settling in her home country, though we have changed plans sinse and are now going to marry and settle in Canada).
To our surprise, the CBSA appealed the ruling. Our lawyer believes that the purpose of the appeal is to counter the precedent that the ruling sets in requiring the CBSA to actually collect and present evidence.
The apparent motive for the appeal gives me the impression that I should expect the CBSA to fight this appeal tooth and nail. What I don't get is what to expect from an appeal hearing that does not try to argue that the judge had overlooked evidence but rather that the judge should have taken the CBSA at its word that if it says my fiancée is guilty then she's guilty and that the CBSA should have no obligation to prove her guilt and that any evidence in her favour should just be ignored.
If that is in fact how the CBSA intend to fight this, then we can expect the hearing to delve not on the evidence but rather on legalese procedural mumbo jumbo as to why the evidence doesn't matter.
Looking back on it, maybe we should have expected this coming.
The CBSA's hearings officer at the hearing seemed to take the matter very personally, as if the ruling was a personal attack against the CBSA officer in question. Even at the CBSA office after the ruling in my fiancée's favour, the officer there initially refused to return her passport saying angrily that they believed that she was guilty and will appeal because they want her removed from Canada. Only after her lawyer sent the CBSA a warning letter reminding it of the criminality of its refusal to return her passport did it return it to her.
Has anyone else here ever experienced the CBSA adopt such a malicious attitude towards a person bordering on harassment and taking a ruling in the accused's favour so personally?
If so, what should we expect from this?
We're confident we will win again but just wonder why the CBSA would want to retry a lost cause. Is it really just as a vindictive form of revenge, to make the process her punishment, something else?
The official reason in brief is that the minister did not meet its burden. It was clear listening to his concluding remarks that the member had concluded the CBSA to have been completely negligent in the collection and corroboration of evidence even to the point of seeming to try to suppress the presentation of evidence.
Given that my fiancée was just on a travel visa that will expire soon, the member mentioned that in principle the CBSA could appeal his ruling but that it is highly unlikely sinse she'll be leaving soon anyway (since we were planning on marrying and then settling in her home country, though we have changed plans sinse and are now going to marry and settle in Canada).
To our surprise, the CBSA appealed the ruling. Our lawyer believes that the purpose of the appeal is to counter the precedent that the ruling sets in requiring the CBSA to actually collect and present evidence.
The apparent motive for the appeal gives me the impression that I should expect the CBSA to fight this appeal tooth and nail. What I don't get is what to expect from an appeal hearing that does not try to argue that the judge had overlooked evidence but rather that the judge should have taken the CBSA at its word that if it says my fiancée is guilty then she's guilty and that the CBSA should have no obligation to prove her guilt and that any evidence in her favour should just be ignored.
If that is in fact how the CBSA intend to fight this, then we can expect the hearing to delve not on the evidence but rather on legalese procedural mumbo jumbo as to why the evidence doesn't matter.
Looking back on it, maybe we should have expected this coming.
The CBSA's hearings officer at the hearing seemed to take the matter very personally, as if the ruling was a personal attack against the CBSA officer in question. Even at the CBSA office after the ruling in my fiancée's favour, the officer there initially refused to return her passport saying angrily that they believed that she was guilty and will appeal because they want her removed from Canada. Only after her lawyer sent the CBSA a warning letter reminding it of the criminality of its refusal to return her passport did it return it to her.
Has anyone else here ever experienced the CBSA adopt such a malicious attitude towards a person bordering on harassment and taking a ruling in the accused's favour so personally?
If so, what should we expect from this?
We're confident we will win again but just wonder why the CBSA would want to retry a lost cause. Is it really just as a vindictive form of revenge, to make the process her punishment, something else?