1 / 6

What’s the point of reading these cases?

What’s the point of reading these cases?. examples of the kinds of situations people find themselves in, and level of scrutiny of visa officers all cases using OLD law

eros
Télécharger la présentation

What’s the point of reading these cases?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. What’s the point of reading these cases? • examples of the kinds of situations people find themselves in, and level of scrutiny of visa officers • all cases using OLD law • standard of review: “…courts should not interfere with the exercise of discretion of a sttty authority merely bc the court might have exercised the discretion in a different manner…” + good faith, natural justice, nothing irrelevant or extraneous

  2. Yang v Canada 1989 • writs of mandamus and certiorari • “intention” of Act and subsequent interpretation • elements of fairness: how to count experience (v substantive); opportunity to refute; made decision w/o looking at material requested • self employed • n.b. remedy

  3. Orzhekhovskiy v Canada 2004 • skilled worker subclass • CAIPS • certified question procedure • why did he ‘win’ and what did he win?

  4. Qin v Canada • entrepreneur category • use of Immigration Act cases for fairness standards • delegation is OK but here it breaches specific statutory terms

  5. Agcheloo v Canada 2003 • investor category • how many opportunities to produce documentation?

  6. Alam v Canada 2004 • skilled worker category • substituted assessment, now reg 76(3) • note para 22: heavier onus to justify use of negative discretion than to justify use of positive discretion

More Related