Do You Need An Immigration Lawyer Or Can You Do It By Yourself

Immigration law is one of the most complex areas that there is in the law field. And not only is it complicated but it can change without warning and often does. Do you need an immigration lawyer? Consider the facts.

You Could Do It

You could attempt the immigration process without an immigration lawyer, but do you really want to? How interested are you in learning all the ins and outs of immigration law on your own? Do you want to risk making mistakes in the immigration process just because you did not choose to hire an immigration lawyer? If you want to take the time to learn everything there is to know about immigration law then you could. But why bother?

What Could Go Wrong?

You may not learn everything you need to learn. You may come across information that is outdated without realizing it. Your case may have special circumstances that will affect the immigration process but you may not know enough to know that. You could even make enough mistakes to have to try the process again only to decide the second time that it would be easier to hire an immigration attorney.

What Can An Immigration Lawyer Do For You?

An immigration lawyer can begin by taking a look at your unique situation and how that situation might affect the immigration process. They will then be able to tell you about any and all benefits for which you might be eligible because they will be aware of any recent changes in the immigration process. They can direct you in the best course of action to achieve the legal status that you seek.

One of the biggest perks of having an immigrations lawyer is that they can fill out and submit all the right paperwork. They can keep you updated on the status of your case and help you avoid any delays. They can represent you if court appearances are necessary. They can file appeals for you and use their experience to handle whatever might come up. Only an immigration lawyer has this experience.

Do you need an immigration lawyer? You do not need one but you probably want one. An immigration lawyer does much more than file your paperwork. They stay by you through the immigration process to make sure that it all works out exactly the way you want it to. And with as little trouble or delay as possible.

Visit Michael Golden office or website in you need an immigration lawyer in BC, Canada.

Defining The Parameters Of Limitation Periods In Personal Injury Actions

A limitation period is a stated period of time, the expiry of which extinguishes a party’s legal remedy and forbids the commencement of a legal action. Each province in Canada has general statutes of limitations and many provincial and federal statutes contain limitation periods applicable to a variety of causes of actions. Traditionally, limitation periods have been strictly enforced. More recently, the subject of when time begins to run has received greater attention from our courts.

The discoverability rule has evolved fairly recently in our civil jurisprudence.1 It gives relief in certain factual situations by extending a limitation period. According to the discoverability rule, a limitation period begins to run when the material facts upon which an action is based have been discovered, or ought to have been discovered by the plaintiff through the exercise of due diligence. The effect of the rule is to postpone the running of time until a reasonable person, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, would discover the facts necessary to maintain the action.2 It is a general rule applied to avoid injustice.

It is now over two years since the Supreme Court of Canada upheld the Ontario Court of Appeal’s decision in Peixeiro v. Haberman. Justice Major in Peixeiro adopted Taddle’s J. A.’s statement in Fehr v. Jacob (1993), 14 C.C.L.T. (2d) 200 (Man. C.A.) at 206, which is as follows:

In my opinion, the judge-made discoverability rule is nothing more than a rule of construction. Whenever a statute requires an action to be commenced within a specified time from the happening of a specific event, the statutory language must be construed. When time runs from “the accrual of the cause of action” or from some other event which can be construed as occurring only when the injured party has knowledge of the injury sustained, the judge-made discoverability rule applies. But, when time runs from an event which clearly occurs without regard to the injured party’s knowledge, the judge-made discoverability rule may not extend the period the legislature has prescribed.

In Peixeiro the court concluded that the limitation period under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act did not start to run in a personal injury action arising out of an automobile accident until the plaintiff discovered facts that could sustain a claim that his or her injuries met the threshold under the Insurance Act.

Since Peixeiro, the discoverability rule has enjoyed broad application in Ontario in motor vehicle actions and actions against municipalities and the provincial crown. As such there is now a body of jurisprudence on the scope and application of Peixeiro. The purpose of this paper is to review the way Ontario courts have applied Peixeiro in the context of personal injury litigation so that the parameters of the present authorities in the area of motor vehicle actions and actions against municipalities and the provincial crown can be better understood and defined

Experience Best Overseas Immigration With Immigration Overseas

Immigration is all about exploring the rich prospects that caters towards the goodwill at every step.
There are several benefits that attract high group of targeted candidates from different parts of the globe. Some of the benefits related to migration are:
Innovative educational environment
Skilled professional opportunities
Varying business opportunities
Great pension and health care benefits
For choosing choosing and migrating towards your dreamland, there are certain pain points that need to be evaluated and accomplished in order to expand the migration ground. The immigration is a term that is constantly expanding its arm in terms of daunting rules and regulations that a country put forward, keeping the entire legal process, ensuring security of the country from every sense.

In this regard, visa consultant in Delhi are refraining the entire procedure keeping in mind the individual qualification of every migrant and thereby relocating them to various countries. They are the one who is cherishing the lives of people by helping them migrate and settle in a new destination country. Being in touch with the rules and regulations of various countries, these professionals guide the candidates well licensing towards a legally governed procedure and securing their dream at every step. Their vision is clearly projected in their work as they offer an effective, often responsive and a transparent consulting environment that is completely invoked with professionalism. Immigration consultants work collectively with the migrants holding their aspirations well treating every individual with due importance and often meeting the deadlines in a very affluent manner. They are the immigration professionals who are collectively genius striving for honesty and professionalism very often. Migrants are thus seeking for the representation by these immigration consultants in Delhi with the hope of fulfilling the dream of migrating to a new destination in an easy way without any complication and boundations.

Immigration Overseas is a registered organization that has been offering best of the overseas immigration services catering towards the needs of the aspirants and increasing the ambition of those who are willing to migrate and settle in a new country. Our immigration law firm is headed by well experienced migration lawyers the skilled immigration consultants in Delhi, who provide quality guidance and associating immigration services to every candidate seeking migration. Immigration Overseas is a name to reckon regarding the visa services, securing dreams of thousands of aspirants worldwide. With offices in countries like Australia and Canada and are thus extending very strong and elongated service arm worldwide. Our vision as an immigration law firm is to help the clients with complete migration related assistance creating a strong podium for them to migrate easily. Immigration Overseas thus through sole representation of its professionals is creating better immigration future tomorrow presenting vivid podium of visa consultation, documentation, job assistance and complete range of pre and post landing assistance.

We welcome clients from every field of life, including healthcare, finance, fashion and even multinational corporations.

Are Royal Assent, Pardons And Prorogation Fact Or Legal Fiction

Elizabeth II is the Head of State of the United Kingdom and fifteen other member states of the Commonwealth of Nations. These countries are constitutional monarchies, meaning that they operate under an essentially democratic constitution, the Queens principal role being to represent the state. Very often, she is viewed as a symbolic and apolitical personage with no real power. But is this entirely true? Does the Queen really possess purely nominal authority, or can she in fact exercise her will in any public action? This is not an easy question to answer. I will attempt to do so by focusing mainly on one of her most important theoretical prerogatives: the right to grant or deny royal assent to laws passed by Parliament.

A difficulty in judging the extent of the authority presently held by the monarchy lies in the fact that the British constitution has not been codified into one single document and much of it remains unwritten. The extensive power that the monarch once indisputably possessed, including the right to administer justice, dissolve Parliament or pardon crimes, was largely a matter of common law and not statute. What laws were codified (the Bill of Rights of 1689 and the Act of Settlement of 1701 standing among the most important) served more to restrict the Monarchs power than to entrench it. Thus, the residual powers still reserved to the Queen continue to be more a matter of constitutional convention than of written rules. Formally, no Act of the British Parliament becomes a proper law until it is given assent by the Queen. Yet in practice, Elizabeth II assents to all bills, irrespective of her opinion on them. The last time a British monarch rejected a law was in 1708, when Queen Anne vetoed the Scottish Militia Bill, and even then, she did so at the request of her ministers. Since then, the right of royal assent has fallen into disuse, leading some constitutional theorists to claim that a new convention obligating the monarch to assent to all bills has arisen. This view was famously stressed by Walter Bagehot in his 1867 volume The English Constitution:

…the Queen has no such veto. She must sign her own death-warrant if the two Houses unanimously send it up to her. It is a fiction of the past to ascribe to her legislative power. She has long ceased to have any.

In earlier generations, such a bold assertion of the monarchs supposed lack of power would have been unpardonable. Even I see some flaws in this theory. For one thing, the only evidence on which it stands (besides Bagehots claim) is custom. Even if all the monarchs since Queen Anne have assented to all bills presented to them, there is no formal change in any official policy that would indicate that the practice will be followed for the next bill. Additionally, if the Queen decided to withhold assent to a bill, what legal mechanism could force her to do otherwise? It would seem to me that in such an event, the veto could only be effectively circumvented by some kind of revolutionary act – as a minimum, by the Government refusing to respect the veto, which would undoubtedly lead to a constitutional crisis.

The situation is more clear-cut in Canada, which, unlike the United Kingdom, has a constitution that is largely written. The Constitution Act, 1867 clearly delineates the powers of the Crown. According to Section 55 of the Act, when the Governor General (the Queens representative in Canada) is presented with a bill that has been passed by Parliament, he may declare that he assents to it in the Queens name, that he withholds his assent, or that he reserves the bill for the signification of the Queens pleasure (letting the Queen decide the matter; according to Section 57, she may do so within two years after the Governor General receives the bill). Furthermore, as per Section 56, the Queen in Council (the Queen acting on the advice of her Privy Council) may disallow a law assented to by the Governor General within two years after receiving a copy of the law. Therefore, the Queen, together with the Governor General, does have the formal authority to veto a law passed by the Canadian Parliament. Nevertheless, no Governor General has done this since Confederation in 1867, although some provincial Lieutenant Governors have vetoed provincial laws or reserved them to the pleasure of the Governor General (under the authority of Section 90 of the Constitution Act, 1867). This happened most recently in 1963 when Saskatchewans Lieutenant Governor Frank Bastedo reserved a bill.

On top of that, there are instances in recent Commonwealth history of other royal prerogatives being directly exercised by the Crown against a governments wishes. Depending on the country, the crown may have extensive official powers, including the appointment of ministers, granting of pardons for eliminating criminal records, or calling an early election, and some of these have been exercised in person, especially during unclear political situations. A classic example is Governor General Byngs 1926 refusal to call a very early election at the request of Canadian Liberal Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, who wished to remain in power despite the stronger footing of the Conservative party in Parliament. Byng refused to do so; King was incensed by this supposed infringement on democracy, but Byng stood his ground. Another famous example was the dismissal of Prime Minister Gough Whitlam by Australian Governor General John Kerr during the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis. Whitlams controversial government did not have control of both houses of Parliament and he petitioned Kerr to call a half-senate election. Instead, Kerr dismissed him and appointed Malcolm Fraser, the leader of the Opposition, in his place.

The fact that the royal prerogative is rarely exercised, if at all, by the Queen and her representatives, appears to be more the product of a conventional good will on their part than an actual legal requirement. I hope Bagehot would pardon me if I surmised that he overdid it when he claimed that the Queen must sign her own death-warrant; what he was speaking about was more a matter of everyday practice as he saw it than a real summary of the standing law. After all, the monarchy seeks to stay popular and in todays age of democracy, its very existence depends on public approval.

Take Help Of An Immigration Lawyer For Immigration To Canada

There are various individuals who are fascinated by immigrating to Canada as this is often one country that gives tremendous opportunities and choices to explore for brand new immigrants. Folks prefer immigration to Canada than other country as it has higher job opportunities for immigrants. In fact, the majority of people return here to figure, to start out a brand new life. And, this can be one country where you’ll notice relatively low degree of racism and discrimination within the society, as people living here are terribly open minded and they are ready to welcome people from alternative countries. Most of the privileges extended to Canadian citizens are enjoyed by immigrants. Immigrating to Canada permanently is an exciting opportunity.

Immigration to Canada has a ton of benefits and also the Canadian Government encourages it as helps in economic growth and creates cultural diversity and understanding of different nations. When immigration to Canada one gets the right to live and work anywhere in the country. One can assume for immigration to Canada along with their alternative relations, as well as children.

Immigration to Canada is lengthy method and there are tons of paper works to handle. The best manner to use for immigration to Canada is by contacting an immigration Consultant. In Canada, there are various good immigration lawyers who can facilitate your out with visas, work permit, refugee claim and tons more. Immigration lawyers provide immigration advice and facilitate to visa candidates, sometimes for a fee. But, hiring an immigration lawyer is up to you as it is nothing like your application can be given special attention or it will be done faster.

However, there are several things you ought to think about before hiring an immigration lawyer.

Hunt for an immigration Consultant counseled by individuals you trust. In fact, talk to a minimum of two to three potential advisers before selecting one.

Inquire concerning the training and expertise the immigration lawyers have and the areas they expertise.

Hire an immigration Consultant who is a professionally certified licensed member of the ‘Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants’.

Collect info regarding the services they supply and their fee structure. Get this information in writing.

Avoid hiring immigration lawyers who refuses to answer your queries or are not giving satisfactory answers.

Scan the written contract fastidiously before you sign it. The contract should have all the promised services listed properly and even the fee structure should be clearly set out.

Never leave your original documents needed for immigration to Canada with the immigration lawyer.

Before signing up the applying kind create sure it not blank. If there are some papers or documents that you don’t understand. Keep copies of any documents that are ready for you safely as you might would like it in future.

Raise the immigration lawyer to update you on the status of your application on a regular basis.