Hello every One, and welcome to the Super Natural Sunday Re-View, thank King or Queen You for joining Me, it is always a pleasure to have You. I’ve been away for a few days after receiving defense counsel’s opposition materials to My Motion late (Lucky) Wednesday afternoon, just after I had been tall King about how ridiculous it is that they were taking so long. I am very pleased to finally receive the materials and shared My excitement with a second Post last Wednesday, though I have since been distracted thing King about how I Wish to respond.
The reason it is difficult to determine how to respond is because the materials Presented to Me were somewhat disappointing. I had already asserted that My belief was that defense counsel would claim they did not violate any of the Rules of the Court (and therefor the judge’s determination is final), and that the proper [Court] process should be an application to appeal the decision.
Those are precisely the opposing arguments defense counsel has Presented to Me, so that Part is not a surprise. What surprises Me, is that defense counsel is relying on the very same point of authority (Rule 2.1.01(6)), and suggesting that both Me and the Court Will be too stupid to know that a private email request to the Court does not equal ‘file with the Registrar’?!
Request for Order
(6) Any party to the proceeding may file with the registrar a written request for an order under subrule (1). O. Reg. 43/14, s. 1.
For Me, this is very straightforward. ‘Filing with the Registrar’ means that an application (requisition) must be filed with the Court (Registrar). Every process of the Court requires a Court form to commence the Action which provides the Court (Registrar) with the necessary information to provide the appropriate direction – what authority is required to hear the request (judge, registrar, et cetera), what Rules allow for the request, that sort of thing. Filing with the Registrar also Gives the One filing the materials a receipt of filing by showing the date and Signature the materials were received. That Way, if someone like Me says, “No, Your Honour, that is not True; defense counsel did not file a request to dismiss with the Registrar in accordance with Rule 2.1.01(6), or there would be a Record of that filing on the Court of Record. Let the Court of Record Show that defense counsel did not file any materials with the Registrar and were noted in default on July 13th for failing to do so within the twenty days provided for by the Rules.”
If it is not on the Court of Record, it didn’t (officially) happen (and if it did, it most certainly did not happen within the processes of the Court) – it’s really that simple. So My ‘Reply Factum’ could be equally simple – I just go to the Court, request a printout of the Court of Record and include it as ‘proof’ that no materials were ‘officially’ filed with the Court by defense counsel before July 13th, and that the filing was for a Statement of Intent to defend, not a requisition to dismiss under 2.1.01(6). It is also important to note that the reason it is necessary to provide proof of filings with the Registrar is to ‘account’ for the Court’s time – most filings require a fee to pay for the services one is as King for. Defense counsel petitioned the Court privately, and the judge did not get paid (by the Court) to make the determination because it’s not on the Record. Could I be as King to be paid for hours I didn’t work at a job? Of course not. Sally doesn’t get paid for determinations she makes outside of the Court process – unless she’s getting paid privately by the city of Ottawa…
I could make this really messy for the city of Ottawa by filing a freedom of information request for a printout of the Court of Record to Show (beyond any shadow of doubt) that defense counsel is lying (fraud, perjury) and no materials (request Letter or otherwise) was ever filed with the Court by defense counsel on June 22nd. Judges are making deals for the city of Ottawa behind closed doors, without the Court’s knowledge, and in (serious) breach of the Rules of the Court and the Rule of Law. I wonder if the city of Ottawa knows that the charge for bribing a judge in Canada is an indictable, criminal offense and punishable with a sentence of up to fourteen years in jail? If there is no request from the Court for Sally to make this determination, then it must have come from the city of Ottawa in private emails.
What blows Me away most, is that defense counsel includes ALL parts of Rule 2.1.01(6), as if they genuinely believe that both Me and the Court do not know the difference between a private email outside of the Court process and without knowledge to all parties, and a filing with the Registrar. Honestly, when I read it, I presumed that any judge or justice who reads it Will find it just as entertaining. Clearly, the Courts know this is not how One goes about ‘filing a request’ with the Registrar. Defense counsel even asserts at the end of his motion materials that a request under Rule 2.1.01(6) does not require any filing with the Registrar!!!
“Rule 2.1.01 does not contemplate the filing of any motion materials and none were filed.”Jeremy Wright, defense counsel, city of Ottawa
On the surface, this statement is True – no ‘Motion’ materials were filed with the Court by defense counsel, but to state that 2.1.01(6) does not contemplate the filing of any motion materials?.. Of course it does – if that’s how One chooses to requisition the Court. For Rule 2.1.01(6), the Claim must be accepted as fact on its face, it is not to dispute (oppose) the arguments Presented, so a “Motion” may well not be the appropriate Way to make the request. That’s why I am thing King a ‘request for an Order’ would probably be the appropriate Action.
There are other processes that may be more appropriate and I’m not a lawyer, so I’m not going to suggest what the most appropriate Action (filing) Will be under this Rule. There are many Court forms (provided by the Rules of Civil Procedure) that are available, a ‘Motion’ is just one of many Ways to officially file a request. I am thing King that a ‘Request for Order’ might be appropriate. Whatever means a party uses to be as King of the Court to make any kind of determination always begins with a Court filing with the Registrar, and a ‘Court filing’ is (specifically) any document entered onto the Court of Record. If it is not on the Court of Record, it is taking place outside of the Court process, and is a violation of Rule 1.09. Notice how defense counsel doesn’t mention the breach of 1.09 in their opposition materials? That effectively means their breach of Rule 1.09 is ‘unopposed’, along with a plethora of other unopposed points of authorities supporting this Motion.
I’m going to include the legal definition I found with My points of authorities which clarifies what constitutes a ‘legal’ filing.
1) v. to deposit with the clerk of the court a written complaint or petition which is the opening step in a lawsuit and subsequent documents, including an answer, demurrer, motions, petitions, and orders. All of these are placed in a case file which has a specific number assigned to it which must be stated on every document. The term is used: “When are you going to file the complaint,” or “The answer will be filed tomorrow.” 2) n. the master folder of a lawsuit kept by the clerk of the court, including all legal pleadings (pages) filed by both sides. Each case file has an assigned number, and each document in the file must have a stamp showing the date it was received and the name of the clerk who received it. Any document which is filed must be served on the opposing attorney, usually by mail, except that the first paper filed (complaint, petition, motion) must be served on all defendants personally (hand delivered by a process server). 3) n. the record an attorney keeps on a case, containing all papers deposited with the clerk, as well as all correspondence and notes on the case.
So honestly, I took three days off to try and figure out defense counsel’s strategy because these points are very clear and Will be well known by the Court and any competent justice. I have no Idea why defense counsel would choose to include Rules of the Court they know they violated and is easily proved by the Court of Record. I’m also reasonably sure that the only reason the Court directed Me to serve the Notice of this Motion upon the defendants is because the Courts know better than anyone that this determination was not sanctioned by the Court and was not even known to be taking place by the Court.
The Courts were legitimately as blindsided by this as I was and I believe that instructing Me to serve the Notice of Motion on the defendants is exactly the same kind of ‘non-partisan’ warning from the Court to defense counsel advising them that they know this determination was not ‘sanctioned’ by the Court. Just like ‘the Courts’ knew that defense counsel would be forced to be as King of Me for more time as they ran into default waiting for a reply to their unfiled request outside of the Rules of the Court by responding to that email letter request only to Me. I believe they equally anticipated that defense counsel would know that if there had not been substantial evidence to support vacating this Order, the Courts would have advised Me that I am not able to Motion the Court and must file for an appeal. The Courts would not allow Me to serve this Motion if it were a violation of the Rules of the Court. The Courts cannot provide legal advise, but they are able to provide legal direction – if I were attempting to employ an incorrect procedure, they would advise Me of the correct forms required to proceed with the Action I Wish to take.
So I’ve been partially procrastinating and partially strategizing. Right now, I feel My best strategy is to Create My Motion Record, a Motion Factum (not required for all Motions but there is Good cause for one here because defense counsel is opposing so few points of authority, it Will be Good to have them clearly articulated for ease of reference for the Court so they know how many points are unopposed), and My Reply Factum.
One of the things I find most interesting is that defense counsel doesn’t really appear to have any real opposing arguments. Sure, they cite a few examples of case law but it’s just like citing the Rules of Civil Procedure when the Rules cited have not been followed. The case law cited does not apply and has not been Given any context related to the Motion or Claim (Sally did the same thing). The very same case law cited (if One reads the full determination and decision) also states:
“bringing proceedings for a purpose other than the assertion of legitimate rights“Gao v. Ontario (Workplace Safety and Insurance Board), 2014 ONSC 6497, 37 C.L.R. (4th) 7, at paras. 14-15, Myers J.
Oh, wait… So if there is a clear violation of a legitimate right, Rule 2.1.01 does not apply? Well, I am thing King that should be helpful, especially seeing as I’m citing the same case file example.
Honestly, I can’t help it but I feel a little sorry for the city of Ottawa. I mean, I legitimately have no clue just how much influence the city of Ottawa generally has with the Courts, and I can’t help but feel they are still going to try to do something underhanded to Keep this from coming before a competent Court, but I never imagined they would actually cite the Rules they broke and try to suggest that their private email to the Court is a legitimate filing. I sincerely believe any Court judge Will find it as laughable as I do, yet they evidence their ‘filing’ to show a private email to the court that was not even cc’d to Me (evidence of their first violation of the Rules if they did not request My consent first).
And really, the fact that defense counsel voluntarily changed their lawyer of Record when they received Notice of this Motion indicates to Me that junior legal counsel is in over her head and knows she’s in serious trouble. Rather than fessing up and making things right, senior counsel is endorsing defense counsel’s contempt for the Rules of the Court and the direction provided to them by the Court (even if it comes through Me, as long as I can Show the direction was provided by the Court, it is the same – defense counsel wasn’t told because she’s a lawyer and should know this is NOT how One files documents with the Court).
So I’m hoping to have everything ready to file on or before Friday of this week, and I Will be filing all of My materials at the Courthouse so I know they are ‘on the Court of Record’.
Finally, I figure I should probably touch on defense counsel’s other opposing argument. Rule 2.1.01 exists to protect the Court from unnecessary expenses in rare situations where there is no hope that the case could succeed, even if the plaintiff were Given leave to amend their pleadings. A Motion to Vacate is much the same. I considered what evidence and grounds I would require for an appeal to succeed. Some of the grounds are; One party did not have a fair hearing, a party showed gross contempt for the Rules of the Court that interfered with fairness, false or misleading testimony on the Court of Record, a judge or justice known to to be biased to One of the party’s to a proceeding (like Justice Bobby Beaudoin making ruling on a Matter involving the Salvation Army when he is featured in their paper advocating for the social programs he’s trusted with making a determination regarding). That was how I first discovered that the city profiles judges who are likely to be sympathetic to their cause.
The last Matter the city had dismissed was not issued by the Court, either – it was also negotiated by Way of private pleadings but I was too ‘green’ to know what to do about it. I’m learning and I’ll Keep You Posted (and hopefully a little more frequently though I do have a busy week ahead, including a viewing for a new potential apartment). But now I’m beginning to develop a collection of the city of Ottawa’s dirty deeds done behind closed doors and outside of the Rules of Civil procedure. Jeremy Wright was once a government ‘whip’ – if You don’t know that that is, look it up (I had to).
Love and Blessings,