加拿大家园网


加拿大家园论坛 > 香港进度 > [原创] 关于“自由裁量权”----不能不知道的真相

[原创] 关于“自由裁量权”----不能不知道的真相
剑走川锋 2005-11-03 13:43

[原创] 关于“自由裁量权”----不能不知道的真相

剑走川锋

经常泡在坛子里的移友们都听到过“VO拥有‘自由裁量权’”这个说法,也很想知道到底什么是“自由裁量权” ,什么情况下VO会行使“自由裁量权”。它似乎并不只是自评分不够67分的朋友们的一块心病,67分或以上的朋友偶尔也会产生担忧—“我会不会被VO给自由裁量掉了?”

1.什么是“自由裁量权”

“自由裁量权”的英文正式名称是“Substituted Evaluation”,直译为“替代性评估”,即在VO认为自己给出的评分不足以完全表明申请人能否在加拿大经济自立的时候,依照“移民及难民保护条例 IRPR R76(3)款”所授予的权力,对申请人进行的非常规评估。

IRPR R76 (3) Whether or not the skilled worker has been awarded the minimum number of required points referred to in subsection (2), an officer may substitute for the criteria set out in paragraph (1)(a) their evaluation of the likelihood of the ability of the skilled worker to become economically established in Canada if the number of points awarded is not a sufficient indicator of whether the skilled worker may become economically established in Canada.

This authority may be used if an officer believes the point total is not a sufficient indicator of whether or not the applicant may become economically established in Canada.

2.VO进行自由裁量时,在多大范围内能自主决定哪些因素可以纳入相关考虑因素范围

VO行使“自由裁量权”时,并无一个事先规定的相关因素列表来限制VO认为的相关因素范围。VO可认为一个或多个因素都是可以影响到申请人是否能在加拿大经济自立的相关因素。

The scope of what an officer might consider as relevant cannot be limited by a prescribed list of factors to be used in support of exercising substituted evaluation. There are any number and combination of considerations that an officer might cite as being pertinent to assessing, as per the wording of R76(3): “. . . the likelihood of the ability of the skilled worker to become economically established in Canada. .

3.VO行使“自由裁量权”的频率如何

使用频率因签证处而异,由各签证处自行决定。如某签证处认为他们的case中有更多的状况显示申请人所获评分与申请人的经济自立能力之间存在脱节,该签证处可以更多的行使自由裁量权。

Frequency of use will vary from visa office to visa office, as some will find in their caseloads more situations of disconnect between the point total and establishment prospects than will others.

4.分数接近及格分是否就一定促使VO行使自由裁量权

答案是不一定。需由VO自行识别并用文件记录/证明有哪些事实可说明评估分不足以显示申请人的经济自立能力。

The fact that the applicant “almost attained” a pass mark is not, in itself, grounds to recommend the use of substituted evaluation. Rather, the officer needs to identify and document the facts demonstrating that the points awarded are not a sufficient indicator of the applicant's ability to become economically established in Canada.

5.VO行使“自由裁量权”的程序

分两种情况:
(1)申请者的评估分达到及格线
在此情况下,如果VO决定自由裁量,即行使“否定性的自由裁量权”,
A.需告知申请人自己的疑虑,并给申请人足够的机会对VO的疑虑作出反应。该交流可以通过信函或面试的方式。
B.需获得指定官员的书面同意。
(2)申请者的评估分未达到及格线
在此情况下,如果VO决定自由裁量,即行使“肯定性的自由裁量权”,需获得指定官员的书面同意。

If an officer decides to use substituted evaluation when the applicant did meet the pass mark (i.e., negative substituted evaluation)
• communicate their concerns to the applicant and provide
sufficient opportunity to the applicant to respond to these
concerns, through correspondence or an interview;
• obtain written concurrence from a designated officer.

If an officer decides to use substituted evaluation when the applicant did not meet the pass mark (i.e., positive substituted evaluation)
• obtain written concurrence from a designated officer.

6. “自由裁量权”不得与官方在非常特殊的情况下,基于人道同情而给与准入加拿大的权力相混淆。也不能撤销因安家费不足导致的拒签
Substituted evaluation is not to be confused with humanitarian and compassionate authority, which enables the Minister or his/her delegates to override inadmissibility and grant admission to Canada in a range of situations involving sufficiently compelling circumstances.

Pursuant to R76(3), substituted evaluation (see Section 11.3) cannot be used to override a refusal due to insufficient funds.

7.可否主动要求VO行使“自由裁量权”

联邦法庭判例法显示:如果申请人或其代理口头或书面请求VO考虑行使“肯定性自由裁量权”,VO必须仔细研究该案状况。在申请人的案例并不成为需动用“自由裁量权”的迫切案例的时候,VO并无义务进行面试。如VO认为无动用“自由裁量权”的必要,应在审理笔记和拒签信中注明。VO在拒绝行使“肯定性自由裁量权”时,无须征得指定官员的同意。

Federal Court case law indicates that if an applicant or their representative requests orally or in writing that the officer consider exercising these powers in the applicant’s favour, officers must examine the circumstances. There is no requirement that an interview be conducted in all cases when the applicant did not make a compelling case for substituted evaluation. If officers do not consider substituted evaluation appropriate in the circumstances, they should indicate this in file notes and in the refusal letter. Officers do not need the concurrence of the designated officer to deny requests for the use of positive substituted evaluation.

需补充说明的是,技术移民的各甄选标准是客观的且有清晰详尽的定义和说明的。一般情况下,申请人的适合性可由申请表格的内容和相应的佐证材料予以确定。
Selection standards are objective and clearly defined, and eligibility can be assessed in straightforward cases through the information provided on the application for permanent residence forms and the accompanying supporting documentation.

References:
1.IRPR (Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations)
2. OP 技术移民申请海外审理说明

Don 2005-11-03 13:47

好文, 沙发, 先顶一个.

剑兄好文, 解释了一个非常关键的概念, 非常感谢. 今天刷暴了, 明天一定狠狠砸!

xu2004 2005-11-03 13:49

说得真详细,加声望

偏偏 2005-11-03 13:57

剑峰真的好厉害!!崇拜的。

不过俺自己还是迷糊些的好。老是揣测这些VO的心思,太累了。最好模模糊糊ME就来了。PL也来了。模模糊糊拿了visa就飞了…………哈哈。

点点 2005-11-03 13:57

:wdb20: 没坐到沙发,就算坐到地上也要好好研究研究。

wingwinggg 2005-11-03 14:03

说得好,支持,加声望!

点点 2005-11-03 14:08

引用:

作者: 偏偏
剑峰真的好厉害!!崇拜的。

不过俺自己还是迷糊些的好。老是揣测这些VO的心思,太累了。最好模模糊糊ME就来了。PL也来了。模模糊糊拿了visa就飞了…………哈哈。

我也希望是在迷迷糊糊的状态下就搞定移民。:wdb23:

蒙蒙牛 2005-11-03 14:09

好文.加SW

Evergreen Tree 2005-11-03 14:10

今天网络不稳定,没法给川锋加纷纷了,今天晚上回家补给你!!

偏偏 2005-11-03 14:11

引用:

作者: candere
我也希望是在迷迷糊糊的状态下就搞定移民

嘿嘿。迷迷糊糊是一种幸福哦。分分来了。

luckyluo 2005-11-03 14:16

不错,大家都关心的问题。

蒙蒙牛 2005-11-03 14:17

引用:

作者: 偏偏
嘿嘿。迷迷糊糊是一种幸福哦。分分来了。

这种权利就看个人的造化了.分不到不是绝对没希望,分到也不是绝对安全.

点点 2005-11-03 14:22

剑兄、剑峰、川锋(哈哈,灌篮高手)——不如我们统一一个名字,找一个朗朗上口又方便书写的名字给LZ。

wyman 2005-11-03 14:26

收藏+珍藏

剑走川锋 2005-11-03 14:46

谢谢各位朋友的支持!VO这个“自由裁量权”也是困扰我很久的一块心病,我就怕他/她作不利裁决的自由度太大了。现在起码我知道,VO如果要对我的case有什么不利的自由裁量的话,他/她会告知我并给我机会作出反应。我也就不用经常去看状态有没有突然变成DM。。。:wdb4:

florenceguangyu 2005-11-03 14:46

不错,顶!

Don 2005-11-03 14:59

引用:

作者: 剑走川锋
谢谢各位朋友的支持!VO这个“自由裁量权”也是困扰我很久的一块心病,我就怕他/她作不利裁决的自由度太大了。现在起码我知道,VO如果要对我的case有什么不利的自由裁量的话,他/她会告知我并给我机会作出反应。我也就不用经常去看状态有没有突然变成DM。。。:wdb4:

这样的好帖子一定要狠狠砸, 看帖子的谁不砸谁就对不起剑兄和加拿大政府.

这就证明了分数够不一定就高枕无忧.

再感谢剑兄一次.

Don 2005-11-03 15:06

引用:

作者: candere
剑兄、剑峰、川锋(哈哈,灌篮高手)――不如我们统一一个名字,找一个朗朗上口又方便书写的名字给LZ。

有道理, 发挥大家的想象力, 得出结论之后不需要剑兄的同意, 好不好?:wdb20: :wdb20:

偏偏 2005-11-03 15:09

引用:

作者: 剑走川锋
谢谢各位朋友的支持!VO这个“自由裁量权”也是困扰我很久的一块心病,我就怕他/她作不利裁决的自由度太大了。现在起码我知道,VO如果要对我的case有什么不利的自由裁量的话,他/她会告知我并给我机会作出反应。我也就不用经常去看状态有没有突然变成DM。。。

是的,拒签不是一件儿戏的事情。必须给出理由的。并且他要考虑你上诉的可能性。

KittyCat 2005-11-03 15:10

楼主学法律的?

剑走川锋 2005-11-03 15:25

引用:

作者: KittyCat
楼主学法律的?

:wdb24: 说的好听点的话 我是学英语情报学的。。。。。其实就是英语图书馆信息学:):wdb4: 国内目前对图书馆学依然有点prejudice 我自己好像也有。。再汗。。。

KittyCat 2005-11-03 15:31

我也学了一点点啊,Library and Information Studies,可惜后来没坚持下来哦。当时把我给郁闷死了。

偏偏 2005-11-03 15:32

图书馆学俺也有些兴趣哦。听说到加要念的话,得master才行。

KittyCat 2005-11-03 15:34

偏偏:yes and yes。不过我是真得没兴趣哦,我以为我会有兴趣,但是我上了不到一学期,我实在坚持不下来了,就撤。

剑走川锋 2005-11-03 15:42

引用:

作者: 偏偏
是的,拒签不是一件儿戏的事情。必须给出理由的。并且他要考虑你上诉的可能性。

说得好!所以在"技术移民海外审理说明"中,对于VO行使“自由裁量权”有特别注明:为着法律上的清晰性起见,建议VO使用法律术语!如“替代性评估(自由裁量权)”或“经济自立能力”。
“For legal clarity, officers should employ the terms used in legislation, such as “substituted evaluation” or “ability to become economically established.”

偏偏 2005-11-03 15:42

哈哈。Kitty猫猫说的我兴趣大减哦。我一直希望到加国学一个感性的东西(因为大学是理工科,没劲),看来这个不行了。

KittyCat 2005-11-03 15:44

也没准就对偏偏你的胃口呢,反正我是没坚持下来。

偏偏 2005-11-03 15:52

俺大学的时候就念的郁闷死了。星期五的晚上,人家文科的同学就在风花雪月,舞厅泡泡,卡拉ok唱唱,俺们还在上高数!!我晕!!俺们老师还说:你们自己上了这贼船~~~ 吐血中……

偏偏 2005-11-03 15:53

引用:

所以在"技术移民海外审理说明"中,对于VO行使“自由裁量权”有特别注明:为着法律上的清晰性起见,建议VO使用法律术语!如“替代性评估(自由裁量权)”或“经济自立能力”。
“For legal clarity, officers should employ the terms used in legislation, such as “substituted evaluation” or “ability to become economically established.”
剑峰同学研究的好透彻哦。佩服不已~~~阿!!

Don 2005-11-03 15:54

引用:

作者: KittyCat
我也学了一点点啊,Library and Information Studies,可惜后来没坚持下来哦。当时把我给郁闷死了。

公告: 本贴从这里开始偏偏........:wdb23:

Don 2005-11-03 15:55

引用:

作者: 偏偏
俺大学的时候就念的郁闷死了。星期五的晚上,人家文科的同学就在风花雪月,舞厅泡泡,卡拉ok唱唱,俺们还在上高数!!我晕!!俺们老师还说:你们自己上了这贼船~~~ 吐血中……

上了贼船才能发达嘛, 不当海盗哪里有机会出人头地.

剑走川锋 2005-11-03 16:31

引用:

作者: don.hanks
公告: 本贴从这里开始偏偏........:wdb23:

哈哈哈 继续偏:我们一般叫 Library and Information Science 哈哈 用science好像比较有面子 虚荣心理在作怪:wdb4: 不过我还是承认用studies更准确:)

然后再偏回来:部分朋友担心最近如果真有新法规出台的话,会不会对自己的case产生影响。一句话宽心丸---我在一份叫做"Building a Nation"的CIC常务委员会的报告中看到这样的一句话,虽然已经是两年多前的提法,但我认为它的精神应该是last forever的。----" Altering the selection system after an individual has made an application is unfair and cannot be tolerated."

kinndydu 2005-11-03 16:36

好文,大家都喜欢,我来顶,可是没弹药了。

Don 2005-11-03 16:36

引用:

作者: 剑走川锋
哈哈哈 继续偏:我们一般叫 Library and Information Science 哈哈 用science好像比较有面子 虚荣心理在作怪:wdb4: 不过我还是承认用studies更准确:)

然后再偏回来:部分朋友担心最近如果真有新法规出台的话,会不会对自己的case产生影响。一句话宽心丸---我在一份叫做"Building a Nation"的CIC常务委员会的报告中看到这样的一句话,虽然已经是两年多前的提法,但我认为它的精神应该是last forever的。----" Altering the selection system after an individual has made an application is unfair and cannot be tolerated."

这是法律里面的常识-不追溯原理.

偏偏 2005-11-03 16:46

引用:

" Altering the selection system after an individual has made an application is unfair and cannot be tolerated."
支持!!!!

点点 2005-11-03 17:25

就一会儿没来,筒子们都开偏啦,支持!

点点 2005-11-03 17:27

引用:

作者: 偏偏
哈哈。Kitty猫猫说的我兴趣大减哦。我一直希望到加国学一个感性的东西(因为大学是理工科,没劲),看来这个不行了。

偶也学的理工科,不想再学了,偏偏你说咱们去学些什么有劲的啊?

偏偏 2005-11-03 17:34

引用:

作者: candere
偶也学的理工科,不想再学了,偏偏你说咱们去学些什么有劲的啊?

是哦是哦,好好谋划谋划。如果俺们能够做同学倒也不错哦。开心!!

点点 2005-11-03 17:36

趁现在时间还比较宽裕,可得好好想想。

剑走川锋 2005-11-03 17:41

引用:

作者: don.hanks
这是法律里面的常识-不追溯原理.

但是目前加拿大移民法似乎依然不排除可追溯条款(Retroactive Clauses)。
尽管上次75分pass mark的追溯行为最终被高院驳回,但我们也只能从判例法的角度可以认为以后也不会追溯这种不利于申请人的条款。

KittyCat 2005-11-03 18:42

怎么越看你越像学法律的?

betsuni 2005-11-03 18:48

有几点疑问:
1、VO是在申请人分数不够的情况下使用“自由裁量权”,还是对所有申请者使用?
举个例子,A申请者65分,VO使用“自由裁量权”后能就成了68分
B申请者,自评68,VO是否要使用他的“自由裁量权”了?如果使用了
会不会VO给的分数就变成了65分(VO觉得申请者某些条件不好)
2、如果1成立的话,那么所谓的67分分数线,岂不成了一句空话?
3、这个自评分的分数在VO眼里到底是什么分量?是不是,VO不会按照咱们的思维去评分?------是否是东西方思维的差异?
4、看过日报关于申请速度的帖子,越来越觉得VO申案没什么规律可寻,如果说分高的快的话,还真有,分数满高,速度很慢的情况!------大家自评分肯定是按照指南上说的严格评出来的,所以我觉得VO不会理会咱们的自评分,他们有他们的一套方法!
以上是我的疑问和自己的一些拙见,欢迎大家拍砖:)

KittyCat 2005-11-03 18:56

公司招聘???

Don 2005-11-03 21:04

引用:

作者: KittyCat
公司招聘???

:wdb24: :wdb24: :wdb24:

Don 2005-11-03 21:04

#42楼的问题, 还是等LZ来亲自回答, 俺也跟着学习学习.

点点 2005-11-03 22:37

引用:

作者: betsuni
有几点疑问:
1、VO是在申请人分数不够的情况下使用“自由裁量权”,还是对所有申请者使用?
举个例子,A申请者65分,VO使用“自由裁量权”后能就成了68分
B申请者,自评68,VO是否要使用他的“自由裁量权”了?如果使用了
会不会VO给的分数就变成了65分(VO觉得申请者某些条件不好)
2、如果1成立的话,那么所谓的67分分数线,岂不成了一句空话?
3、这个自评分的分数在VO眼里到底是什么分量?是不是,VO不会按照咱们的思维去评分?------是否是东西方思维的差异?
4、看过日报关于申请速度的帖子,越来越觉得VO申案没什么规律可寻,如果说分高的快的话,还真有,分数满高,速度很慢的情况!------大家自评分肯定是按照指南上说的严格评出来的,所以我觉得VO不会理会咱们的自评分,他们有他们的一套方法!
以上是我的疑问和自己的一些拙见,欢迎大家拍砖:)

1、对所有申请者
2、不是一句空话(至少在你浪费申请费后,不能怨VO)
3、VO没有要求申请人提供自评分
4、既然VO没要求提供自评分,不存在理不理的问题。
综上所述,个案独立,无需也无法比较。

剑走川锋 2005-11-03 22:47

引用:

作者: betsuni
有几点疑问:
1、VO是在申请人分数不够的情况下使用“自由裁量权”,还是对所有申请者使用?
举个例子,A申请者65分,VO使用“自由裁量权”后能就成了68分
B申请者,自评68,VO是否要使用他的“自由裁量权”了?如果使用了
会不会VO给的分数就变成了65分(VO觉得申请者某些条件不好)
2、如果1成立的话,那么所谓的67分分数线,岂不成了一句空话?
3、这个自评分的分数在VO眼里到底是什么分量?是不是,VO不会按照咱们的思维去评分?------是否是东西方思维的差异?
4、看过日报关于申请速度的帖子,越来越觉得VO申案没什么规律可寻,如果说分高的快的话,还真有,分数满高,速度很慢的情况!------大家自评分肯定是按照指南上说的严格评出来的,所以我觉得VO不会理会咱们的自评分,他们有他们的一套方法!
以上是我的疑问和自己的一些拙见,欢迎大家拍砖:)

1。理论上“substituted evaluation”对所有申请者适用。如果你再细读一下,你会发现实际操作中VO行使“否定性的自由裁量权”所需程序较繁琐,必须通知申请人,必须花较长时间跟申请人“拉锯”,必须获得指定官员(即主管领导)的同意。所以我们完全可以ASSUME that VOs normally do NOT challenge the standard criteria once the applicant scores 67 or more. 也许是“自由裁量权”这个翻译方式导致了很多移友的担忧。其实这个叫做“替代性评估”,一般情况下,VO没有任何理由要用自己的判断力来替代分数线,因为分数线理论上是达到适应力的标志。再说白点,没有特殊理由,VO没必要换评估方式!
2. 1 不成立。VO使用“自由裁量权”时,必须书面给出肯定或否定的理由,这个理由必须是要经得起推敲和论证的。正如前面的朋友所说,他们必须考虑申请人上诉获胜的可能性!他们经过所谓的“自由裁量”后,给出的意见不是加几分或减几分,而是申请人“能否在加拿大经济自立”。请注意我在前面提到过VO在进行“替代性评估”时被要求尽量使用法律用语。所以应该不是在完成评估后加分减分。那个分数是他/她自己评估出来的,怎么可能又由自己挑起去加减呢?!
3。我觉得这个担忧是多余。前面提到过,现行的评分体系是评价客观,定义清晰,解释详尽的。不存在东西方思维差异的问题,这种说法太玄。
4。个案独立!分数高也可能带来滞延审核的因素,比如亲属证明,比如在加拿大的工作经历,比如第三国的留学,工作等经历,比如是否这些高级人才曾在敏感部门供职。。。凡此种种,不一而足。各个案的审理时间不具有可比性,只有一个大致审理时长而已。另外不排除部分律师在代理申请人的case的时候,提供了足够的理由,请求VO把申请人的case作为“compelling case”来处理。一经批准,则可能极大地缩短审理时长。

Don 2005-11-03 22:51

引用:

作者: 剑走川锋
4。个案独立!分数高也可能带来滞延审核的因素,比如亲属证明,比如在加拿大的工作经历,比如第三国的,比如是否这些高级人才曾在敏感部门供职。。。凡此种种,不一而足。各个案的审理时间不具有可比性,只有一个大致审理时长而已。另外不排除部分律师在代理申请人的case的时候,提供了足够的理由,请求VO把申请人的case作为“compelling case”来处理。一经批准,则可能极大地缩短审理时长。

赞! 对第四点来说, 好的中介就发挥出作用来了, 但也要碰到好的客户背景和好的价钱.

PS, 剑兄好贴, 一个下午已经到3页了, 恭喜恭喜.

wingwinggg 2005-11-03 23:12

呵呵呵~~~~~~~

偏偏 2005-11-03 23:33

剑峰说的很客观。我相信绝大部分的case被拒签都是理由充分的。而且他们也不会轻易的拒签。

偏偏 2005-11-03 23:35

俺也听说过有上诉成功的,这时候就是中介起作用的时候了。

从此也可以侧面的看出所有的评估都是有依据的、客观可以列出来的,绝对不是vo的主观性在起主导作用。

剑走川锋 2005-11-04 00:24

引用:

作者: 偏偏
我相信绝大部分的case被拒签都是理由充分的。而且他们也不会轻易的拒签。

支持!
我们不妨来冷静地看一看我们最不愿意看到的东西---拒签信的模板。VO使用这三类模板来撰写三类不同的拒签信:
模板一:因未达技术移民的最低要求而致拒签,此类拒签一般都是因NOC工作经历未达一年,或VO认为其工作经历根本不在NOC之OAB之列。
OP 6 Federal Skilled Workers
2005-08-31

Appendix A Refusal on minimum requirements for skilled worker - Sample letter
INSERT LETTERHEAD
Our Ref.:
INSERT ADDRESS
Dear :
I have now completed the assessment of your application for a permanent resident visa as a skilled worker and have determined that you do not meet the requirements for immigration to Canada.
Pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, applicants in the federal skilled worker class are assessed on the basis of the minimum requirements set out in subsection 75(2) and the criteria set out in subsection 76(1). The assessment of these criteria determines whether
a skilled worker will be able to become economically established in Canada. The criteria are age, education, knowledge of Canada’s official languages, experience, arranged employment and adaptability.
Your application was assessed based on the occupation(s) in which you requested assessment (add title of the occupation and NOC code for each occupation in NOC skill type 0 or skill level A or B which the applicant has claimed experience). The table below sets out the points assessed for each of the selection criteria:
Points assessed Maximum possible
Age 10
Education 25
Official language proficiency 24
Experience 21
Arranged employment 10
Adaptability 10
Total 100
If the applicant has obtained zero points for the requirement of one year full-time employment experience within the ten years preceding the application, and therefore does not meet the skilled worker requirements, add:
Subsection 75(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations states that a foreign national is a skilled worker if
(a) within 10 years preceding the date of their application for a permanent resident visa, they
have at least one year of continuous full-time employment experience, as described in subsection 80(7), or the equivalent in part-time employment in one or more occupations, other than a restricted occupation, that are listed in Skill Type 0 Management Occupations or Skill Level A or B of the National Occupational Classification matrix;
(b) during that period of employment they performed the actions described in the lead statement for the occupation as set out in the occupational descriptions of the National Occupational Classification; and
(c) during that period of employment they performed a substantial number of the main duties of the occupation as set out in the occupational descriptions of the National Occupational Classification, including all of the essential duties.

I am not satisfied that you meet the (choose one or more: first, second, third) part of these requirements because (provide reasons.)

Subsection 75(3) states that if a foreign national fails to meet these requirements, the application shall be refused and no further assessment is required. I am not satisfied that you meet these requirements. I am therefore refusing your application.


If the applicant has paid the RPRF, add:
The Right of Permanent Residence Fee that you have paid is refundable. (Add as appropriate)
You will receive a cheque from the (choose as appropriate) Embassy/High Commission/Consulate within a few weeks. (or) Please contact the Canadian (choose as appropriate) Embassy/High Commission/ Consulate in ………… for information concerning the method of reimbursement and the date at which you can obtain the refund.
Thank you for the interest you have shown in Canada.
Yours sincerely,
Officer
cc: fee_

点点 2005-11-04 00:26

:wdb20: 坐个沙发好好研究下~~~~~~~~~~~

剑走川锋 2005-11-04 00:37

模板二:VO使用“否定性自由裁量权”判断申请人无法证明其能在加拿大经济自立而导致的拒签
Appendix B Refusal on discretion - Sample Letter
INSERT LETTERHEAD
Our Ref.:
INSERT ADDRESS
Dear :
I have now completed the assessment of your application for a permanent resident visa as a skilled worker and have determined that you do not meet the requirements for immigration to Canada.
Subsection 12(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act states that a foreign national may be selected as a member of the economic class on the basis of their ability to become economically established in Canada. Subsection 75(1) of the Regulations prescribes the federal skilled worker class as a class of persons who are skilled workers and who may become
permanent residents on the basis of their ability to become economically established in Canada.
Pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, 2002, skilled worker applicants are assessed on the basis of the definition set out in subsection 75(2) and the criteria set out in subsection 76(1). The assessment of these criteria determines whether a skilled worker will be
able to become economically established in Canada. The criteria are age, education, knowledge of Canada’s official languages, experience, arranged employment and adaptability.
Your application was assessed based on the occupation(s) in which you requested assessment (add title of the occupation and NOC code for each occupation in NOC skill type 0 or skill level A or B which the applicant has claimed experience). The table below sets out the points assessed
for each of the selection criteria:
Points assessed Maximum possible
Age 10
Education 25
Official language proficiency 24
Experience 21
Arranged employment 10
Adaptability 10
Total 100
Subsection 76(3) of the Regulations permit an officer to substitute their evaluation of the likelihood to become economically established in Canada if the number of points awarded are not a sufficient indicator of whether the skilled worker may become economically established in Canada.
As discussed with you at your interview, I am not satisfied that the points that you have been awarded are an accurate reflection of the likelihood of your ability to become economically established in Canada. I have made this evaluation because (provide reasons.) You were given an opportunity to address these concerns at your interview. The information you have given me and your explanations have not satisfied me that you will be able to become economically established in Canada. A senior officer concurred in this evaluation.
Subsection 11(1) of the Act states that a foreign national must, before entering Canada, apply to an officer for a visa or for any other document required by the Regulations. The visa or document shall be issued if, following an examination, the officer is satisfied that the foreign national is not inadmissible and meets the requirements of this Act. Subsection 2(1) specifies that unless otherwise indicated, references in the Act to “this Act” include regulations made under it.
Following an examination of your application, I am not satisfied that you meet the requirements of the Act and the Regulations for the reasons explained above. I am therefore refusing your application.

If the applicant has paid the RPRF, add:
The Right of Permanent Residence Fee that you have paid is refundable. (Add as appropriate)
You will receive a cheque from the (choose as appropriate) Embassy/High
Commission/Consulate within a few weeks. (or) Please contact the Canadian (choose as appropriate) Embassy/High Commission/ Consulate in ………… for information concerning the method of reimbursement and the date at which you can obtain the refund.
Thank you for the interest you have shown in Canada.
Yours sincerely,
Officer
cc: fee____

剑走川锋 2005-11-04 00:49

模板三:以分数不足为理由的拒签信

Appendix C Refusal on points - Sample Letter
INSERT LETTERHEAD
Our Ref.:
INSERT ADDRESS
Dear :
I have now completed the assessment of your application for a permanent resident visa as a skilled worker and have determined that you do not meet the requirements for immigration to Canada.
Subsection 12(2) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act states that a foreign national may be selected as a member of the economic class on the basis of their ability to become economically established in Canada. Subsection 75(1) of the Regulations prescribes the federal skilled worker class as a class of persons who are skilled workers and who may become
permanent residents on the basis of their ability to become economically established in Canada.
Pursuant to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, 2002, skilled worker applicants are assessed on the basis of the requirements set out in subsection 75(2) and the criteria set out in subsection 76(1). The assessment of these requirements determines whether a skilled worker
will be able to become economically established in Canada. The criteria are age, education, knowledge of Canada’s official languages, experience, arranged employment and adaptability.
Your application was assessed based on the occupation(s) in which you requested assessment (add title of the occupation and NOC code for each occupation in NOC skill type 0 or skill level A or B which the applicant has claimed experience). The table below sets out the points assessed for each of the selection criteria:
Points assessed Maximum possible
Age 10
Education 25
Official language proficiency 24
Experience 21
Arranged employment 10
Adaptability 10
Total 100
You have obtained insufficient points to qualify for immigration to Canada, the minimum requirement being 67 points. Add reasons why applicant was unable to obtain sufficient points. You have not obtained sufficient points to satisfy me that you will be able to become economically established in Canada.(请特别留意这句话并不是简单地说分数不够,而是说所获分数不足以让VO确信申请人能在加拿大经济自立!)
Subsection 11(1) of the Act states that a foreign national must, before entering Canada, apply to an officer for a visa or for any other document required by the regulations. The visa or document shall be issued if, following an examination, the officer is satisfied that the foreign national is not
inadmissible and meets the requirements of this Act. Subsection 2(1) specifies that unless otherwise indicated, references in the Act to “this Act” include regulations made under it.
Following an examination of your application, I am not satisfied that you meet the requirements of the Act and the Regulations for the reasons explained above. I am therefore refusing your application.

If the applicant has paid the RPRF, add:
The Right of Permanent Residence Fee that you have paid is refundable. (Add as appropriate)
You will receive a cheque from the (choose as appropriate) Embassy/High
Commission/Consulate within a few weeks. (or) Please contact the Canadian (choose as appropriate) Embassy/High Commission/ Consulate in ………… for information concerning the method of reimbursement and the date at which you can obtain the refund.
Thank you for the interest you have shown in Canada.
Yours sincerely,
Officer
cc: fee____

Don 2005-11-04 00:57

强烈建议本贴加精!

点点 2005-11-04 01:15

引用:

作者: don.hanks
强烈建议本贴加精!

加精偶没有权利,置顶还可以为之。置顶了,筒子们可得好好研究研究LZ的帖子。:wdb10: :wdb10:

wingwinggg 2005-11-04 01:30

cool~~~~~~~~

Don 2005-11-04 01:54

引用:

作者: 偏偏
剑峰说的很客观。我相信绝大部分的case被拒签都是理由充分的。而且他们也不会轻易的拒签。

剑峰~~~~~! 偏偏你可真能偏! 还可以砍掉的.

点点 2005-11-04 12:57

引用:

作者: don.hanks
剑峰~~~~~! 偏偏你可真能偏! 还可以砍掉的.

偏偏当然偏偏喽

偏偏 2005-11-04 13:03

引用:

剑峰~~~~~! 偏偏你可真能偏! 还可以砍掉的.
什么可以砍掉呀?千万表乱砍哦~~

KittyCat 2005-11-04 13:18

刚才不是还在置顶吗?害的我没找着,现在怎么下来啦?

点点 2005-11-04 13:21

置顶贴子好多筒子都不看,所以先放下来看看情况,等过段时间再置顶。

KittyCat 2005-11-04 13:22

对,我也不怎么看置顶的,所以刚才没找到呢。

20041018 2005-11-04 14:56

支持,给加SW!

蒙蒙牛 2005-11-05 16:41

钱律师的看法:
我在过去那么多年的执业经历中,遇到第一个提出这个问题的人是一位曾经移民加拿大的申请人,第二次申请时被拒绝。他来找我时,拿来的就是一封类似的信(不过,那是在旧法下的信。内容略微有些不同。原则是一样的)。他第二次提出移民申请时,分数也是完全够的。但是,因为他在三年前曾移民过加拿大,因为在加拿大找不到工作,所以,就回愿居住地了。三年后,再次申请时,移民官用否定的自由裁量权,将他拒绝了。原因就是:有充分的证据证明,他在加拿大无法生存。他去问了很多中介,别人都告诉他,没有问题。可以再申请。只有我告诉他,在没有做好充分的准备的前提下,绝对不应该再送新的申请。因为,否定性的自由裁量权是很厉害的。一旦移民官这样认定了,要翻案就难了。

自由裁量权之厉害处在于,没有法官可以轻易改变他们的决定。这是超越法律的权利。是做律师最怕的权利。

一个技术移民,可能被拒绝的,也就是你所说的三种情况:

一是总分不够,二是最起码的几项要求达不到(列如,工作经验未满一年),三是在前两者都不是的情况下,移民官还是因为你没法在加拿大生存而拒绝你。

因第三种情况被拒绝的情况,很有可能发生在中国的医生、中、小学教师、法官、律师身上。因为,这些人没有一份在加拿大生存所必需的职业资格证书,他就很难证明他能够在加拿大生存。一旦被拒绝,翻案就比较难办。因为,这是自由裁量权。

偏偏 2005-11-05 17:47

引用:

因第三种情况被拒绝的情况,很有可能发生在中国的医生、中、小学教师、法官、律师身上。因为,这些人没有一份在加拿大生存所必需的职业资格证书,他就很难证明他能够在加拿大生存。一旦被拒绝,翻案就比较难办。因为,这是自由裁量权。
有道理!!!

yao2004bj 2005-11-05 18:56

关于自由栽量权,我想大家真正关心的是:当一个申请人不够移民及格分,VO是如何对这个人行使生杀大权的。在这种情况下的自由栽量权是有非常详细的标准的,不会让VO凭主观想法自由行使这个权力,并且这也需要VO的SUPERVISOR最终拍板决定。

日报¥ 2005-11-05 19:33

这里真热闹呀!! 好吸引人. 摇摇晃晃我来也!!

yao2004bj 2005-11-05 19:34

引用:

作者: 日报¥
这里真热闹呀!! 好吸引人. 摇摇晃晃我来也!!

:wdb21: :wdb21: :wdb21:

Don 2005-11-06 01:16

好帖子还要再砸一次.

KittyCat 2005-11-07 10:13

don.hanks:你开个每日英语吧?教教我们,一天一个用法就行啊。

Don 2005-11-07 13:06

引用:

作者: KittyCat
don.hanks:你开个每日英语吧?教教我们,一天一个用法就行啊。

:wdb4: :wdb4:

俺看见gangnet每天教英语, 还想去跟着学呢, 可惜完全静不下心来学, 每天总有这点那点事情. 让俺开每日英语, 那真是赶俺上架啊, 俺自己上不去摔趴了倒不要紧, 怕把架子也撞塌了, 那可就罪过了. 好像kittycat现在在加, 俺有机会的话还想跟kitty学学呢, 好未雨绸缪, 别到时候鸡跟鸭讲给中国银丢脸啊.

:wdb20:

Evergreen Tree 2005-11-07 13:46

引用:

作者: don.hanks
:wdb4: :wdb4:

俺看见gangnet每天教英语, 还想去跟着学呢, 可惜完全静不下心来学, 每天总有这点那点事情. 让俺开每日英语, 那真是赶俺上架啊, 俺自己上不去摔趴了倒不要紧, 怕把架子也撞塌了, 那可就罪过了. 好像kittycat现在在加, 俺有机会的话还想跟kitty学学呢, 好未雨绸缪, 别到时候鸡跟鸭讲给中国银丢脸啊.

:wdb20:


:wdb6: :wdb6:

KittyCat 2005-11-07 14:20

那么让gangnet或者eli8来开一个吧,轻松些的,太冗长的我也坚持不下来。或者大家讨论讨论“Friends”的情节,说点好玩的,正儿八经的学习实在太闷了。

偏偏 2005-11-07 14:24

引用:

那么让gangnet或者eli8来开一个吧,轻松些的,太冗长的我也坚持不下来。或者大家讨论讨论“Friends”的情节,说点好玩的,正儿八经的学习实在太闷了。
好主意哦。聊些好玩的。可能兴趣更大些。支持!!!Kitty猫猫开一个算了。

KittyCat 2005-11-07 14:30

不行啊, 我时间不固定,只能敲敲边鼓,要不咱们大家一起开一个吧?一人一天,谁有空谁来。

点点 2005-11-07 14:35

引用:

作者: KittyCat
不行啊, 我时间不固定,只能敲敲边鼓,要不咱们大家一起开一个吧?一人一天,谁有空谁来。

这个主意不错,轮流来,谁有空就谁发。

KittyCat 2005-11-07 14:38

但是有个主要负责的,eli8快现身,你说你在最近在家里养着,那么你有时间你来主持吧?

偏偏 2005-11-07 14:40

tap在美剧有发friends的学习心得,大家可以在那个贴里聊天呀。

KittyCat 2005-11-07 14:51

在哪里啊?

点点 2005-11-07 15:27


KittyCat 2005-11-07 15:41

谢谢。

KittyCat 2005-11-08 20:25

大家在玩“好好娱乐,天天向上”呢,笑死了可好玩呢,有空过去看看啊。

蒙蒙牛 2005-11-10 14:36

近来有不少人都会问:LZ的这几篇文章中所描述的那些细节是真的吗?是LZ自己想出来的,还是官方的?我在这里可以负责任的明确的说;这些细节都是CIC官方公布的,而且是最新版的,绝不是LZ异想天开写出来的,LZ依据的都是CIC的官方资料,是花了很多精力翻译,分析而写出来的.LZ的这种精神本身就是值得称赞的,再次感谢LZ的努力!

yao2004bj 2005-11-10 20:05

翻译!

DBA 2005-11-10 22:30

谢谢精彩的分析!

wgzyl 2005-11-16 12:25

很有帮助。

wgzyl 2005-11-16 12:25

很有帮助。

fxlc02 2005-11-20 18:14

看这些内容的时候总是很紧张,希望只是学习一下,不要发生在现实里。

Don 2005-11-22 01:12

引用:

作者: fxlc02
看这些内容的时候总是很紧张,希望只是学习一下,不要发生在现实里。

应该不会吧? 安啦.

PS, 头像很漂亮啊, who来的?

jasmine920 2005-12-04 22:03

天哪,vo咋那么多过场哦2

x_ray 2005-12-09 16:51

不去多想了,在国内国外的生活都是一样的,只要自己活得开心!!

alan_wwww 2005-12-28 10:33

hao

lilyhui 2006-03-22 11:13

这个自由裁量权可是一把双刃剑呀

剑走川锋 2006-03-22 11:50

引用:

作者: lilyhui
这个自由裁量权可是一把双刃剑呀

目前就大家了解到的情况来看,这双刃剑基本上还是一把仁慈的剑----上面的杀的少(暂时还没听到有被杀的),下面的免杀的多(不够分获签的很多)

安心化妆品 2006-03-22 15:26

这里好热闹。剑兄好专业。

剑走川锋 2006-03-22 16:13

哈哈 这里已经热闹过了 真正热闹的时候你没赶上:D

nicole1726 2006-03-22 17:55

非常棒~


~~~~~~~~~~~~~`不知道该说啥了

隐形的翅膀 2006-03-22 18:54

非常敬佩LZ的钻研精神!

隐形的翅膀 2006-03-22 18:55

好!

flxiaoguai 2006-09-20 11:04

严重感谢楼主的详细解释!:wdb11:

cindyche 2006-09-20 11:31

谢谢!

moontory 2006-09-20 12:45

LZ好厉害呀,哪里找到的关于VO移民审核方面的资讯呀?加SW了

argchina 2006-10-06 17:56

佩服佩服!

sophie-ca 2006-10-06 18:34

好文

testuser1 2006-11-03 16:44

翻出来,再顶。

肥猫5月来家园,7月碰上91新政,对家园的好印象部分源于楼主,hoho~~~

八年申请路 2006-11-03 16:46

支持肥猫

bighippo 2006-11-03 16:51

从几大牛人剑走川锋、蒙蒙牛、justin-zhu那里收获不少。