V is for Victory: House of von Dehn Verses the City of Ottawa; Case Highlights and Victorious Moments

You know, they even Spell ‘WITHIN TWENTY DAYS’ in the Style of capitus diminutio maxima to get One’s attention. Remember when I Hand Writ mine? I replaced all the ALL CAPS with Red Ink. Words of importance are always in ALL CAPS in the legal fiction, so are Titles. Notice that I did NOT place any of the named plaintiff’s or defendants in all caps? That was intentional, Ladies and Gentlemen – and believe Me it makes a difference. The People are named in the claim, not the position of Office they are Holding. Remember what I told You the Proper Style means? Sean von Dehn = King Sean, House of von Dehn on a Statement of Claim or any other Court or legal document, the ‘legal’ rights are the same. I do not do anything without Intent-Ion, their inherent rights are reserved. It may not be a Gift they comprehend yet, but I am confident that one day they Will.

Okay, so this is really the ‘Highlight Reel’ of great moments. I Will speak more about the Style of this Claim perhaps later on this Page because it was very clear to Me that the Courts like this much better. I’m not going to lie, it’s not like I didn’t know that they would, I just like to be different and eccentric and the fact is, I know that some People Will struggle to put together a proper claim and I assert it should NOT make a difference so long as the content can be understood and there is a clear issue to be resolved. I did not expect the difference would be as monumental as it is. I Will always file this Way from now on, and I Will only get better.

For Highlights, the first Reel is My first Real moment of Glory in this Case. I’m about to leave to Note the defendants in default when I receive an email from their counsel. After two very brief emails, I learn (for the first time) that the defendants are still waiting to hear back from the Court on their ‘motion’ request (made privately in violation of the Rules). I received a reply over a week and a half previous to this exchange and presumed she had received it, too. Now I realize that’s not the case, defense is still waiting, and I get to be the One to break the news to her that she’s not getting a reply, the request was denied and no additional time was provided. She’s two days late already, and I’m on the Way to the Courthouse to Note her in default:

Dear Geneviève,

I have some very bad news for You.  The Court has in Deed responded to Your request.  They provided Me with the Court’s response to Your request on Friday, June 25th.  Your private Letter of request to the Court to dismiss under Rule 2.01.1 has been denied.  The Courts have determined that ‘on its face’, My Statement of Defense is not frivolous and vexatious.  You are free to file a motion under the Rules of Civil Procedure 2.01.1(2) for Summary procedure.

You contacted the Court without My prior consent in a private email You did not share with Me until two days after it had been sent.  Your email Letter of request to the Court was made on June 22nd.  You shared that information and Letter with Me on June 24th.  The Court responded to Me with their answer to Your Letter of request on Friday, June 25th.  They advised Me that You are free to file a motion with the Registrar in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure.  They did not advise Me that You had been granted any Special time privileges or extension on the 20 days provided by the Rules of Civil Procedure, or that I should not Note You in Default if You fail to respond within the timelines provided by the Rules.

By contacting the Court and requesting this be dismissed under subrule 2.01.1,(1), You violated the Rule 1.09. of the Rules of Civil Procedure:


1.09 When a proceeding is pending before the court, no party to the proceeding and no party’s lawyer shall communicate about the proceeding with a judge or case management master out of court, directly or indirectly, unless,

(a) all the parties consent, in advance, to the out-of-court communication; or

(b) the court directs otherwise.  O. Reg. 132/04, s. 2; O. Reg. 438/08, s. 66; O. Reg. 711/20, s. 2.

Summary Procedure

(2) The court may make a determination under subrule (1) in a summary manner, subject to the procedures set out in this rule. O. Reg. 43/14, s. 1.

(3) Unless the court orders otherwise, an order under subrule (1) shall be made on the basis of written submissions, if any, in accordance with the following procedures:

1. The court shall direct the registrar to give notice (Form 2.1A) to the plaintiff or applicant, as the case may be, that the court is considering making the order.

2. The plaintiff or applicant may, within 15 days after receiving the notice, file with the court a written submission, no more than 10 pages in length, responding to the notice.

3. If the plaintiff or applicant does not file a written submission that complies with paragraph 2, the court may make the order without any further notice to the plaintiff or applicant or to any other party.

4. If the plaintiff or applicant files a written submission that complies with paragraph 2, the court may direct the registrar to give a copy of the submission to any other party.

5. A party who receives a copy of the plaintiff’s or applicant’s submission may, within 10 days after receiving the copy, file with the court a written submission, no more than 10 pages in length, responding to the plaintiff’s or applicant’s submission, and shall give a copy of the responding submission to the plaintiff or applicant and, on the request of any other party, to that party. O. Reg. 43/14, s. 1.

I’m going to be honest with You, this is an unusual situation for Me because Your timeline to respond in accordance with the Rules officially expired on Thursday, July 9th.  I was five minutes away from heading to the Courthouse to have You Noted in Default, I was at the Courthouse on Friday to see if You had filed any further motions with the court without My prior consent.  Registrar confirmed for Me that no materials have been presented to the Court and I am able to have You Noted in Default.  I decided to wait until the end of Friday to see if I heard any Word from You over the weekend.

Naturally, I presumed that the reply I received from the Court in response to Your Letter would also have been sent to You.  However…



2.01 (1) A failure to comply with these rules is an irregularity and does not render a proceeding or a step, document or order in a proceeding a nullity, and the court,

(a) may grant all necessary amendments or other relief, on such terms as are just, to secure the just determination of the real matters in dispute; or

So, now that I know You haven’t received a reply from the Court, I can only presume that the Court did not intend for Me to not know You were not Given a response and Will likely presume that I Will already have Noted You in default.  See, when I emailed the Court, it Will have been apparent to the Justice that You violated Rule 1.09, because Rule 2.01.1(6), does not offer any exception to Rule 1.09 and clearly states that if You Wish to make such a request, You must file with the Registrar and Give Me Notice so that I have fair opportunity to provide My defense materials.  We both get to be Present for the hearing if You Wish to bring this before a Justice and under NO CIRCUMSTANCE do You get to plead to the Court without My knowledge.  My Letter to the Court alerted them to the fact that I obviously did not consent to Your private communication and was not in support of Your request (which is the only time any party is able to privately address the court, is with prior consent of all parties).

So perhaps the Courts feel it is in the best interest of Justice that I have You Noted in Default?  My belief is that they provided Me with a response to Your request and not You to balance the scales of Justice and fair Play a little – what do You think?  I’m tempted to share My Letter with You, but I do not believe I am obliged to do so or I’m sure they would have cc’d You on it.  I think this was was the Court determined was in the best interest of Justice for violating the Rules of Civil Procedure (which I didn’t even mention in My Letter by the Way, but they’re not stupid)…

I look very forward to Your reply, preferably before noon if at all possible.

King Sean,

House of von Dehn,

Hand of Stephen,

Kingdom of God.

I do have to tell You, that was a very satisfying email to Write. And I stand on every Word of it. I also Wish to say that I had a lot of People tell Me that I was too ‘nice’ and too ‘soft’ with the city of Ottawa the first time round. I really don’t believe that I was. I believe I am fair, and I believed that one day the Shoe would be on the other foot. Now it is, and I think it fits well.

Love and Blessings,