Just wanted to post my best wishes to my readers and of course thank all of my clients for allowing me the opportunity to assist them this past year.
« November 2008 | Main | January 2009 »
Just wanted to post my best wishes to my readers and of course thank all of my clients for allowing me the opportunity to assist them this past year.
December 25, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
I was at Goodwin McKay's Christmas party last week and ran into Kelly Sundberg, formerly with the CBSA. Kelly is now a PhD candidate and an instructor with the Department of Justice Studies at Mount Royal College. He also has a forthcoming book discussing the changes in Canada's border security (due out later this next year).
December 20, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
I came across Webvaluer.org, an interesting site, when I was checking out WebWorkerDaily. It essentially "values" your site. Comparing my blog with the web sites of various Calgary law firms was interesting. Here's my valuation:
Here's the valuation of Burnet Duckworth & Palmer, with over 100 lawyers and an online presence since 1995:
Here's the valuation of Bennett Jones:
The internet appears to live up to its reputation as the great equalizer - allowing innovative businesses who can provide on-line value and hold their own against much larger firms.
December 16, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Preventive detention should be exceptional means of restraint in a society such as ours. In certain circumstances, foreign nationals can be placed in preventive detention if there are grounds to be believe that they are a danger to the public, or unlikely to appear for a further examination. Individuals held in immigration detention are usually placed in the Calgary Remand Center.
December 12, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
I've appeared before the Federal Court on a number of occasions.
I was going through some of the reported decisions, and remember the work that was involved in getting them before the Court. I find Federal Court practice very challenging, and very rewarding.
One of the more memorable cases was Swarn Singh Sandhu v. Canada (MCI) [2005] FCJ No. 1294, where we were successful in having the decision of a visa officer set aside, largely on the grounds of 'inadequacy of reasons'.
Mr. Sandhu attempt to sponsor one of his two children was forestalled because of the operation of 117(9)(d) of the Regulations (essentially, by failing to list him as a 'dependant' child on his own application for permanent residence).
Another case, Sarkis v. Canada (MCI) FCJ No. 756, involved the breach of residency obligation by a permanent resident, and a negative decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board, which oddly found little hardship in returning the appellant to her country of nationality (Iraq, as I recall, and not Jordan as indicated in the Federal Court judgment) and finding another viable country of return as Libya (where she had no status).
In Kaur v. Canada (MCI) FCJ No. 1306, the applicant's status as a widow from India was a central element of her claim for refugee protection. Corroborative evidence was provided post-hearing, but was not referred to (in fact, the decision seemed to indicate that the evidence in question was not provided) in the decision. While it was highly fact specific, the decision is disturbing as it indicate the very serious consequences flowing from a flawed decision (which can only be rectified by the Federal Court, which is no appeal - leave must be obtained, and is rarely given). What was especially strange here, was the fact that while the Board itself characterized the evidence as 'central', Respondent's counsel (the Department of Justice) reiterated that it was instead, peripheral (at odds then with the decision maker who had the benefit of hearing viva voce evidence and is 'specialized' in refugee determination). The Federal Court decision is brief, but to the point.
December 08, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
When a spousal sponsorship (overseas) is refused, it is generally on the basis that the relationship is not genuine or was entered into primarily for the purposes of immigration to Canada (otherwise known as a "marriage of convenience"). The statutory language is contained at s.4 of the IRPR Regulations:
4. For the purposes of these Regulations, a foreign national shall not be considered a spouse, a common-law partner, a conjugal partner or an adopted child of a person if the marriage, common-law partnership, conjugal partnership or adoption is not genuine and was entered into primarily for the purpose of acquiring any status or privilege under the Act.
In considering whether a marriage is genuine and whether the "bad faith" section 4 of the IRP Regulations applies to it, the Immigration Appeal Division (IAD) tends to look at a number of the same factors. However, these factors are not identical in every appeal as the genuineness of the marriage can be affected by any number of different factors in every appeal. The factors considered can include, but are not limited to the:
December 07, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
I've been approached by a couple of rejected applicants under the skilled worker class. These individuals chose not to submit an IELTS exam and decided instead to provide other documentation to establish their language proficiency. Where the applicant is from a non native English speaking country an approved language test ought to be provided because it takes the guesswork out of determining the applicants score. A refusal based on language proficiency established by other evidence can be reviewed by the Federal Court. Its an expensive route to remedy a refusal but given the fact that most applications have been in process for years, immigrants have a lot invested. Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device
December 03, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
The recently announced ministerial instructions regarding the skilled worker immigrant class may be short lived.
If the current government falls (which is a distinct possibility) these 'instructions' will not govern the handling of new applications received under this class.
December 01, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
As I've said many times in the past, immigrating to another country is not easy.
As the son of immigrants, I saw it first hand. There were more struggles before my birth, and my parents provide me with great perspective and insight into the lives of new immigrants.
This Toronto Star article discusses the difficulties for an immigrant family. Both primary wage earners lost their jobs. Both are struggling to adjust.
Excerpt:
When layoffs scatter workers, as they have with mounting frequency, immigrants are left facing the same problems as their Canadian-born counterparts. But they have additional hurdles, too. Before they can train for new careers many must improve their English. Another complication: Immigrants often find work through community or family relations, which means a husband and a wife, a cousin and an uncle may all become unemployed in one devastating swoop.
For many of these families, it is a time of unforgiving firsts. First employment insurance cheques, first resumés and interviews, the first time filling out government funding forms. The first time forced – thrown, really – into a job market dominated by service-sector work.
For generations, immigrants could find jobs that required few skills, yet gave them a middle-class lifestyle.
That door is closing.
The Sainis plod into the unknown with quiet dignity. They are willing to do whatever it takes. They will be patient. They will not forget to laugh, even if the laughter is often closer to a nervous giggle.
December 01, 2008 | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)