Fix Our World
To Unite All People On a World Scale - Peace Environment Health Empowerment
Regarding Alleged Prejudices.
THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.
Re: Letter from Dalton McGuinty
As someone who does not support Dalton McGuinty in any way, shape or form I find his response to your inquirey completely unbiased. Government officials should not under any circumstances respond to appeals already rejected under a court of law.
To do so undermines the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms under Enforcement, Section 24 subsection 2. Since elected officials are not lawyers and are not entitled to arbitrarily change court decisions, he would not be in a position to even try and even if he'd decided to and somehow the case was won, this violation alone is grounds for appeal which means, you lose again, with the added cost of additional court fees.
Re: Letter with respect to Events listed:
Having reviewed all of the court evidence provided and filed at CanLII, I fail to see the basis of your argument that your rights were somehow compromised.
If the Human Rights Tribunal had mailed you your Request for Reconsideration Form TR-8 regular mail without your express consent, then you might've been able to sue them for a a violation of civil proceedure. However, according to the letter you posted as "event150a", you in fact gave them consent without confirming your address to them via a phone call.
Where under oath they stated themselves this was the last known address, had you not given them consent via a phone call, you might've had grounds for a lawsuit.
Rules of Civil Proceedure 16.03 subsection 4 states: Re:
Mail via Last known address
" Service of a document may be made by sending a copy of the document together with an acknowledgment of receipt card (Form 16A) by mail to the last known address of the person to be served, but service by mail under this subrule is only effective as of the date the sender receives the card. O. Reg. 24/00, s. 3."
Pursuant to 16.03(4), 16.06(1) states:
"16.06 (1) Where a document is to be served by mail under these rules, a copy of the document shall be served by regular lettermail or by registered mail. O. Reg. 535/92, s. 6 (1)."
Pursuant to 16.06 (1) Where a document does not reach person served: 16.07(b) states:
16.07 Even though a person has been served with a document in accordance with these rules, the person may show on a motion to set aside the consequences of default, for an extension of time or in support of a request for an adjournment, that the document, (b) came to the person’s notice only at some time later than when it was served or is deemed to have been served. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 16.07.
I believe the reason that "the system" ultimately failed for you is due to a technicality. Your giving them consent to mail you legal forms regular mail without verifying an address you'd be able to receive it from before hand removed all liability from the human rights tribunal should you not get the letter.
Your appeal was rejected because you failed to respond to a letter mailed to you allegedly on your own terms. If you can prove that you never agreed to have it mailed to you via regular mail then you might have grounds for appeal, but I believe the onus is on you to provide them the correct address prior to mailing documents to you. If they have to mail by your last known address because you did not provide it then that's not their fault.
I came to this website thinking it had something to do with the statement "Premier Dalton McGuinty, Christ Bentley, Hugh Brown, Hamilton Courts, the Crown Attorney, Mayor Eisenberger, the City Councillors as well as the City Police all support spousal abuse 48% of the time."
Statistics are like tarot cards. They're fun to play with to get a vague idea of what's going on, but the day tarot cards establish public policy is the day you can kiss your rights and freedoms goodbye. After reviewing your case, I believe you need help and at least you're reaching out. I'll bookmark this page and respond as I can and I really hope you do get help.
Because your situation was not laid out very clearly, I understand why and I don't advocate abuse(any kind), I'm responding with what little I can offer. I hope that you do not take offense. You seem genuine in your passion, if not a bit misguided and that is something that should be applauded.
Looking forward to correspondence,
Demojen
Re: Letter from Dalton McGuinty
As someone who does not support Dalton McGuinty in any way, shape or form I find his response to your inquirey completely unbiased. Government officials should not under any circumstances respond to appeals already rejected under a court of law.
To do so undermines the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms under Enforcement, Section 24 subsection 2. Since elected officials are not lawyers and are not entitled to arbitrarily change court decisions, he would not be in a position to even try and even if he'd decided to and somehow the case was won, this violation alone is grounds for appeal which means, you lose again, with the added cost of additional court fees.
Re: Letter with respect to Events listed:
Having reviewed all of the court evidence provided and filed at CanLII, I fail to see the basis of your argument that your rights were somehow compromised.
If the Human Rights Tribunal had mailed you your Request for Reconsideration Form TR-8 regular mail without your express consent, then you might've been able to sue them for a a violation of civil proceedure. However, according to the letter you posted as "event150a", you in fact gave them consent without confirming your address to them via a phone call.
Where under oath they stated themselves this was the last known address, had you not given them consent via a phone call, you might've had grounds for a lawsuit.
Rules of Civil Proceedure 16.03 subsection 4 states: Re:
Mail via Last known address
" Service of a document may be made by sending a copy of the document together with an acknowledgment of receipt card (Form 16A) by mail to the last known address of the person to be served, but service by mail under this subrule is only effective as of the date the sender receives the card. O. Reg. 24/00, s. 3."
Pursuant to 16.03(4), 16.06(1) states:
"16.06 (1) Where a document is to be served by mail under these rules, a copy of the document shall be served by regular lettermail or by registered mail. O. Reg. 535/92, s. 6 (1)."
Pursuant to 16.06 (1) Where a document does not reach person served: 16.07(b) states:
16.07 Even though a person has been served with a document in accordance with these rules, the person may show on a motion to set aside the consequences of default, for an extension of time or in support of a request for an adjournment, that the document, (b) came to the person’s notice only at some time later than when it was served or is deemed to have been served. R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 16.07.
I believe the reason that "the system" ultimately failed for you is due to a technicality. Your giving them consent to mail you legal forms regular mail without verifying an address you'd be able to receive it from before hand removed all liability from the human rights tribunal should you not get the letter.
Your appeal was rejected because you failed to respond to a letter mailed to you allegedly on your own terms. If you can prove that you never agreed to have it mailed to you via regular mail then you might have grounds for appeal, but I believe the onus is on you to provide them the correct address prior to mailing documents to you. If they have to mail by your last known address because you did not provide it then that's not their fault.
I came to this website thinking it had something to do with the statement "Premier Dalton McGuinty, Christ Bentley, Hugh Brown, Hamilton Courts, the Crown Attorney, Mayor Eisenberger, the City Councillors as well as the City Police all support spousal abuse 48% of the time."
Statistics are like tarot cards. They're fun to play with to get a vague idea of what's going on, but the day tarot cards establish public policy is the day you can kiss your rights and freedoms goodbye. After reviewing your case, I believe you need help and at least you're reaching out. I'll bookmark this page and respond as I can and I really hope you do get help.
Because your situation was not laid out very clearly, I understand why and I don't advocate abuse(any kind), I'm responding with what little I can offer. I hope that you do not take offense. You seem genuine in your passion, if not a bit misguided and that is something that should be applauded.
Looking forward to correspondence,
Demojen
Views: 114
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Kos Demojen on
-
Whatever you do, don't lose sight of your goal.
Anger is not the sharp edge of the sword, it is the hand that weilds it, and in so doing is a disservice to it's grace.
-
Permalink Reply by Edward Teach on
-
Dem,
Not loosing sight of my goal, that we protect all our freedoms in the Charter. I am not angry I am passionate!
I am however disgusted a severe lack of its application and those who were made aware of it did nothing what does that say about how they are serving Canada?
-
-
What it has said of our government since the war of 1812...that within those hallowed halls lives the corporate interests of a conglomerate sucking the blood out of peter to pay paul and that when push comes to shove, the response our own government gives us to a fair and just request is silence.
We invest alot of money in government officials who are not leaders. Who do the work and push the paper and who could care less if our rights are heard all because ontop of their having an interest in our profit margin, the less work they have to do the less they have to work for.
Make a government job part salary and part wages and I'm sure they'll be more inclined to do their part and do it right or leave their position to those who already are.
Expect things to get worse. We're run by a minority government after all and Harper's a conservative.
-
-
Dem,
First to me first thing is first. If we are expecting to be able to engage in peaceful protest then we must ensure the Charter is not trampled on. If we loose those Chartered rights what actions does the general population / unions/ etc have
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
Blog Posts
Badge
© 2024 Created by FixOurWorld.
Powered by
