Methinks Minister Dorothy Shephard and her mindless minions should do the right thing for Nicky ASAP N'esy Pas Mr Higgs???
---------- Original message ---------- From: Newsroom <newsroom@globeandmail.com> Date:
Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:51:23 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Methinks Minister
Dorothy Shephard and her mindless minions should do the right thing for Nicky
Theriault ASAP N'esy Pas Mr Higgs??? To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank
you for contacting The Globe and Mail.
If your matter pertains to
newspaper delivery or you require technical support, please contact our
Customer Service department at 1-800-387-5400 or send an email to customerservice@globeandmail.com
Methinks Minister Dorothy Shephard and her mindless minions should do the right thing for Nicky by simply restoring the prior arrangements and repaying his Mother Colette Theriault for her losses since they attacked her N'esy Pas?
Mother says she was forced to falsify records to get help for disabled son
In rural St. Martins, no home care is available at the official rate of $14 an hour
Connell Smith · CBC News ·
Colette Theriault had to give up her career to look after her son, Dominic (Nicky) Theriault, 28. (Brian Chisholm/CBC)
Colette
Theriault finds some moments of peace while caring alone for her
profoundly disabled son Nicky, but more and more these days she finds
herself fearing for his future.
The 55-year-old Theriault says
she's refinanced her home, is about to lose her car and lives with the
worry she may be charged with allegedly misusing funding she receive
from the province for Nicky's care.
Her son is 28 and has the body
and weight of a man but wears a diaper, cannot speak and functions at
the level of a two-year-old.
He can suffer a seizure with little warning and cannot, ever, be left alone.
And Theriault cannot find or afford help to look after him.
Provincial
support of $5,156 a month was cut off in April 2018, the day two
Department of Social Development staff arrived at Theriault's home in
St. Martins, west of Saint John on the Bay of Fundy.
She and her son are now surviving on $1,900 a month, an amount that includes $753 disability received by Nicky.
The
social worker and investigator from Social Development who visited in
April informed Theriault she was under investigation, suspected of
improperly using the money she was getting to hire caregivers.
"One
of them tells me that they've received a call, and I'm not allowed to
know who called,"
Theriault said. "They received a call that somebody
said the money that Nicky was receiving for his activities and for
things like that was misused."
Can't move to city
It's a serious charge, and Theriault admits that technically she has not properly accounted for all of the spending.
But
she claims she had no choice. Hiring long-term home-care workers has
proved nearly impossible in St. Martins, as it has in many of New
Brunswick's rural communities.
And said she can't move to Saint
John because her home is fully mortgaged, and the amount she could get
for it is well below the assessed value.
Every time that I had somebody helping me out with Nicky was a blessing.- Colette Theriault
Nicky,
who attended special programs in the regular school system, has
been home full time since suffering an injury on board the school bus in
2012.
For most of the time since then, Theriault has managed his
care, hiring and scheduling caregivers, using the support funding from
the Department of Social Development.
She had been given a free
hand to use the monthly support from the province to manage her son's
care, mainly because the province couldn't find a permanent aide itself.
She is adamant she did not keep any of the money for herself.
There
were times when she did pay more than the allowed $14 per hour to have
someone care for Nicky, so she could handle other chores.
Sometimes
she paid up to $25 an hour for care and admits to later falsifying the
paperwork. She brought the rate down in her records by spreading the
total amount paid over more hours than were actually worked.
Department took over care
Everything came crashing down in April.
After
the visit from the Social Development employees, the department said it
would take over management of Nicky's care and pay for home support
workers directly through an agency.
A department letter dated May
14, 2018, said Theriault's son would receive 11 hours per day of care
from support workers from Integrity Home Health Services of Saint John.
But the plan didn't take into account the well-known shortage of home-care workers in New Brunswick.
Nicky
cannot speak and needs constant care. He's been approved for 11 hours
of home-are support daily but no workers can be found. (Brian Chisholm/CBC)
The
first provincially contracted personal support worker wasn't even
assigned to Nicky until July and lasted just three days. The second one
quit after four.
Theriault has seen no one from Integrity Home Health Services of Saint John since then.
She's not surprised.
Finding
support workers who will travel 40 minutes to her home to perform
chores such as changing Nicky's diaper, on a wage of $14 an hour, has
always been a challenge.
They
can tell me that I might do wrong by their paperwork, but by my Nicky
I've done right. And I know I've done right, there's not argument about
that.- Colette Theriault
Left
without reliable help, Theriault gave up her full-time career as a
holistic therapist six years ago to care for her son full-time, although
she still needed outside help.
"Every time that I had somebody
helping me out with Nicky was a blessing," Theriault said. "There's no
other words for saying that, because I was by myself. I was by myself
mowing the lawn, I was by myself changing his bum, I was by myself when
he was sick, I was by myself doing the groceries.
"Anybody that came out here and offered help, I was more than happy to pay them whatever they wanted."
In six years, Theriault never exceeded the total monthly allotment for home care.
She believes what got her into trouble is little more than management of the paperwork required by the department.
The
forms offer no flexibility when it comes to accounting for expenses and
are not appropriate for situations like hers, she said.
She said
she was questioned in particular about a $3,800 expense she filed to
take her son to a special camp for the disabled in Quebec. She used the
break to make a rare trip to Toronto to see her other son.
Afraid son will be put in group home
Nicky Theriault, his mother Colette and the family dog. (Brian Chisholm/CBC )
Theriault's
claims cannot be confirmed. A spokesman for the Department of Social
Development said confidentiality rules forbid the discussion of any case
involving clients.
Theriault said her biggest fear is that the
uncertain situation will end with Nicky being placed in a group
home. She believes that he would not survive such a change in
environment or that he would end up heavily sedated.
You can make more working in the fast food industry than you can providing care. - Haley Flaro , Ability New Brunswick
But
the past several months without help — and no access to the money the
province would spend on his care if it could find caregivers — have
taken a toll on them both. Family members who provide care to disabled
members are not eligible for provincial support.
"I'm kind of
worried they're going to send me too far deep, and I will not be able to
bring myself back," Theriault said. "So what happens to Nicky [then]?
"They
can tell me that I might do wrong by their paperwork, but by my Nicky
I've done right. And I know I've done right, there's not argument about
that."
Shortage of workers a 'crisis'
Haley Flaro, executive director of Ability New Brunswick, has has heard much of this before.
She described the shortage of home-support workers as a "crisis."
"Our
organization is increasingly concerned about caregiver burnout," said
Flaro, whose organization offers support to disabled people and their
families.
"About 60 percent of the families, adults that we work
with that need home support, have to hire privately because they can't
find an agency that can either fill their hours or provide the level of
care they need.
"You can make more working in the fast food industry than you can providing care."
Trying to make job attractive
Dorothy
Shephard, the minister of social development, says the provincial
government is committed to increasing the number of home-care workers by
making the job more attractive. (Brian Chisholm/CBC)
Minister
Dorothy Shephard, the minister of social development, said the new
government is committed to making it more attractive for people to
become personal support workers.
"We want home care to be a
profession, we want the training and the salary to match the importance
of the profession," Shephard said. "There are some rural challenges and
we need to certainly focus on that."
About 4,500 people are
employed by private agencies in New Brunswick, and Shephard said she
does not yet know how many more are needed.
She said her
department does not yet have its budget numbers for this year and she
cannot say how much money will be devoted to the solving the shortage
of home-care workers.
About the Author
Connell Smith
Reporter
Connell Smith is a reporter with CBC in Saint John. He can be reached at 632-7726 Connell.smith@cbc.ca
Participating in the Sussex-Fundy-St. Martins meet the
candidates event, hosted by the Chamber of Commerce, are Progressive
Conservative candidate Bruce Northrup; Fred Harrison of the Green party; Liberal
Ian Smyth; Peoples Alliance candidate Jim Bedford and David Amos running as an
Independent.
Photo: Tammy Scott-Wallace/Telegraph-Journal
SUSSEX • The rate in which families are leaving the province and the pain
that causes the economy needs to be a primary focus in the Sussex-Fundy-St.
Martins riding this election, said Progressive Conservative candidate Bruce
Northrup.
And to him, closing the door to the development of the province’s natural
resources is the main contributor to the problem of out-migration.
Differing political positions were represented during a meet the candidates
event in the riding Wednesday night.
“Why are they going west?” Northrup asked, answering his own question. “To
work in oil fields, to work in natural gas.”
Those who move away for work are often lost forever as they settle down and
make their family there, he added. Northrup has been staunchly opposed to the
moratorium on hydraulic fracturing Brian Gallant’s Liberal put in place
following the last provincial election.
“We have to develop our natural gas and natural resources to keep them here.
They’re exiting by the hundreds,” Northrup said.
Liberal candidate Ian Smyth, however, sees it differently.
He believes there’s lots of work, but not the right “attitudes.”
He talked about recent job interviews he was conducting on his farm where he
was offering a $13 an hour job. The person he was supposed to interview didn’t
bother to show up or call, and that
Participating in the Sussex-Fundy-St. Martins meet the candidates
event, hosted by the Chamber of Commerce, are Progressive Conservative candidate
Bruce Northrup; Fred Harrison of the Green party; Liberal Ian Smyth; Peoples
Alliance candidate Jim Bedford and David Amos running as an Independent.
Photo: Tammy Scott-Wallace/Telegraph-Journal
SUSSEX • The rate in which families are leaving the province and the pain
that causes the economy needs to be a primary focus in the Sussex-Fundy-St.
Martins riding this election, said Progressive Conservative candidate Bruce
Northrup.
And to him, closing the door to the development of the province’s natural
resources is the main contributor to the problem of out-migration.
Differing political positions were represented during a meet the candidates
event in the riding Wednesday night.
“Why are they going west?” Northrup asked, answering his own question. “To
work in oil fields, to work in natural gas.”
Those who move away for work are often lost forever as they settle down and
make their family there, he added. Northrup has been staunchly opposed to the
moratorium on hydraulic fracturing Brian Gallant’s Liberal put in place
following the last provincial election.
“We have to develop our natural gas and natural resources to keep them here.
They’re exiting by the hundreds,” Northrup said.
Liberal candidate Ian Smyth, however, sees it differently.
He believes there’s lots of work, but not the right “attitudes.”
He talked about recent job interviews he was conducting on his farm where he
was offering a $13 an hour job. The person he was supposed to interview didn’t
bother to show up or call, and that happened five times, Smyth said.
“There’s not a shortage of work. There’s all kinds of work,” he said, “but
attitudes have to change.”
People have the right to leave the province for better work opportunities, he
added.
“It’s all about choices – it’s a free country,” said the father of four young
children.
As someone who left his community of St. Martins where he was fire chief for
22 years to go to Alberta, Peoples Alliance candidate Bedford said, he knows how
difficult it is to uproot. The low wages he was earning picking rocks, however
wasn’t near enough. He sent six resumes to Alberta companies, and he received
calls for work from all six of them.
He lived there with his family for 10 years.
“People are payments away from losing their homes,” Bedford said. “We’re
fooling ourselves when we say how great we are. Look around your neighbourhood,
look around this room.”
Dollar figures on what the sweet spot should be for an adequate provincial
minimum wage fluctuated among parties when the question came up.
Independent candidate David Amos, who ran federally the last time around,
says people are not earning what they need to survive. He believes $18 an hour
is a fair paycheque.
“Why can’t the working man earn what the old man gets?” he said, referring to
his old age pension. He said often the working person still has a family to
raise at home.
But an appropriate minimum wage is not only about another couple bucks for
the worker, Bedford pointed out.
“It’s a fine balancing act,” the Sussex businessman said. A $15 minimum wage,
he said, pushes closer to $35 an hour for the employer who has to contribute
more for employment insurance and Canada Pension Plan for the worker.
A small crowd of voters attended the Sussex and District
Chamber of Commerce event to meet the candidates of Sussex-Fundy-St. Martins on
Wednesday night in Sussex Corner.
Photo: Tammy Scott-Wallace/Telegraph-Journal
That could mean fewer businesses, and in turn fewer jobs.
“You have to look at what the full impact will be,” Bedford said.
Minimum wage in New Brunswick is currently $11.25 an hour, which is similar
to the other Maritime provinces.
But the Liberals are committing as part of their election platform to
increasing it to $14 an hour gradually, Smyth said.
“People need $14 to survive,” he said.
The Green party wants to do even better than that, said candidate Fred
Harrison, by raising the amount $1 a year until it reaches $15.25.
Northrup said the Tories are not committing to an increase.
Amos, Bedford and Northrup all took aim at the controversial carbon tax the
Liberals have committed to.
A small crowd of voters attended the Sussex and District Chamber of
Commerce event to meet the candidates of Sussex-Fundy-St. Martins on Wednesday
night in Sussex Corner.
Photo: Tammy Scott-Wallace/Telegraph-Journal
That could mean fewer businesses, and in turn fewer jobs.
“You have to look at what the full impact will be,” Bedford said.
Minimum wage in New Brunswick is currently $11.25 an hour, which is similar
to the other Maritime provinces.
But the Liberals are committing as part of their election platform to
increasing it to $14 an hour gradually, Smyth said.
“People need $14 to survive,” he said.
The Green party wants to do even better than that, said candidate Fred
Harrison, by raising the amount $1 a year until it reaches $15.25.
Northrup said the Tories are not committing to an increase.
Amos, Bedford and Northrup all took aim at the controversial carbon tax the
Liberals have committed to.
“There’s no disputing climate change,” Amos said. “Mother Nature is going to
do what she wants to do. New taxation isn’t going to fix it.”
Bedford also believes it should be eliminated, as should taxes on used
vehicles. There should also be a major drop in small business tax, he said.
The Progressive Conservative platform has a sharp focus on reducing taxes,
Northrup said.
“My favourite three words in our platform is ‘no more taxes’,” he said. “We
want to put more money in your pockets.
“At the end of the day we’re totally, totally taxed out.”
It was a mild, small crowd of about 25 people that gathered to meet the
candidates hosted by the Sussex and District Chamber of Commerce in Sussex
Corner.
The Chamber held a similar event in early August, before the writ was
dropped.
Wednesday evening’s event took place at the same time a televised debate
among the provincial party leaders was happening.
Fracking, which is often a hot topic in the Sussex region with the business
community supporting it, received varying opinions during the panel
discussion.
Amos is against fracking.
“If there’s nothing in it for all of us, why bother?” he said, referring to
the companies that have more to benefit than New Brunswickers with its
inadequate royalty structure.
But Northup believes there’s a lot of benefit for New Brunswickers to use its
own natural resources, from salt mined in Picadilly, to natural gas.
In his opinion, too much is being brought into the province from outside.
“We need to develop our own resources to benefit ourselves,” he said. People
in the riding need to work, especially since the potash mine in the riding
closed in 2016, taking hundreds of jobs with it.
Bedford cannot reasonably expect there not to be hiccups along the way with
any new developments, but feels “the benefits are going to outweigh the
risks.”
He too believes “we need to depend on ourselves. We need to get people
working.”
Harrison said potential risks need to be fully understood, but generally
speaking he doesn’t oppose natural resource development.
“I would still want to err on the side of the environment and encourage and
develop more natural resources that are sustainable,” the artist said.
---------- Original message ---------- From: "Hardy, Erin
(SNB)" <Erin.Hardy@snb.ca> Date:
Wed, 22 Aug 2018 13:11:58 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Hey Serge Trust
that the First Canadian Title people, the Fidelity minions and many lawyers
will tell you that I will figure out what a form 13a is. To: David Amos
<motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Hello,
I
will be out of the office from August 9-24 inclusive. I will reply to your
email upon my return, however, I will be checking emails periodically. Thank
you.
Bonjour,
Je serai absent du bureau du 9 au 24 août
inclusivement. Je répondrai à votre courriel à mon retour, mais, je
vérifierai régulièrement les courriels. Merci.
----------
Original message ---------- From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com> Date:
Wed, 22 Aug 2018 06:11:54 -0700 Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: Hey Serge
Trust that the First Canadian Title people, the Fidelity minions and many
lawyers will tell you that I will figure out what a form 13a is. To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
(Français
à suivre)
If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick,
please email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
If
your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca
Thank
you.
Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du
Nouveau-Brunswick, svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
Pour
les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
Serge
Gauvin Registrar General of Land Titles Called to the bar: 1995
(NB) Phone: 506-457-6933 Fax: 506-444-3033 Email: serge.gauvin@snb.ca Patrick
V. Windle Deputy Registrar General of Land Titles Called to the bar: 1997
(NB) Email: patrick.windle@snb.ca Service
New Brunswick Land Registry, 985 College Hill Rd. PO Box 1998, Stn.
A Fredericton, New Brunswick E3B 5G4
---------- Original message
---------- From: "Auto-reply from kevhache@nb.aibn.com"
<kevhache@nb.aibn.com> Date:
Sat, 18 Aug 2018 18:20:04 -0400 Subject: Re: Too Funny I just talked to
Claude Landry Elvy Robichaud’s old Chief of Staff He forgot what went down in
2004 and the emails I sent him since To: david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com
Bonjour
Je
serais absent du bureau du 6 aout au 22 aout inclusivement. Le bureau sera
fermé du 6 au 19 aout inclusivement pour les vacances d ete et sera ouvert a
partir du 20 aout. Bonne Vacance a tous
Je retournerais votre courriel a
mon retour.
Kevin J. Hache
CABINET KEVIN J. HACHE 8 Boul
St-Pierre Ouest C.P. 5662 Caraquet NB E1W 1B7 506 727 5150
(telephone) 506 727 6686 (telecopieur) kevhache@nb.sympatico.ca
----------
Forwarded message ---------- From: Brian Gallant <briangallant10@gmail.com> Date:
Tue, 29 May 2018 06:01:57 -0700 Subject: Merci / Thank you Re: Fwd: I just
called Alan Roy again about my right to health care, my missing 1965 Harley,
the Yankee Wiretaps tapes in its saddlebag and Federal Court and his
assistant played dumb as usual To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
(Français
à suivre)
If your email is pertaining to the Government of New Brunswick,
please email me at brian.gallant@gnb.ca
If
your matter is urgent, please email Greg Byrne at greg.byrne@gnb.ca
Thank
you.
Si votre courriel s'addresse au Gouvernement du
Nouveau-Brunswick, svp m'envoyez un courriel à brian.gallant@gnb.ca
Pour
les urgences, veuillez contacter Greg Byrne à greg.byrne@gnb.ca
----------
Forwarded message ---------- From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca> Date:
Sat, 14 Oct 2017 22:51:09 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: RE Irving's
ridiculous constitutional challenge and Federal Court File no T-1557-15 I
wonder if George Cooper and Hélène Beaulieure even know how many times the
Irvings and partners of their VERY snobby law firm have offended me over
t... To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until October 30, 2017. Je serai absent du bureau
jusqu'au 30 octobre 2017.
---------- Forwarded message
---------- From: "Eidt, David (OAG/CPG)" <David.Eidt@gnb.ca> Date:
Wed, 1 Mar 2017 00:33:21 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Yo Mr Lutz howcome
your buddy the clerk would not file this motion and properly witnessed
affidavit and why did she take all four copies? To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until Monday, March 13, 2017. I will have little to
no access to email. Please dial 453-2222 for assistance.
----------
Forwarded message ---------- From: Marc Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca> Date:
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 13:16:46 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New
Brunswick Real Estate Association and their deliberate ignorance for the
bankster's benefit To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until August 15, 2016. Je serai absent du bureau
jusqu'au 15 août 2016.
---------- Forwarded message
---------- From: "McNair, John (SNB)" <John.McNair@snb.ca> Date:
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:29 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New
Brunswick Real Estate Association and their deliberate ignorance for the
bankster's benefit To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office August 1 - August 12. I will reply to your email
when I return. If you require immediate assistance, please contact Chantal
Leger at 663-2510. Thank you.
Je serai absent du bureau les 1 aout - 12
aout. Je répondrai à votre courriel à mon retour. Si vous nécessitez de
l'assistance immédiatement, veuillez contacter Chantal Leger au 663-2510.
Merci.
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Hardy,
Erin (SNB)" <Erin.Hardy@snb.ca> Date:
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 16:04:28 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: RE: The New
Brunswick Real Estate Association and their deliberate ignorance for the
bankster's benefit To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Le
francais suit:
Hello,
I am currently out of the office. I will
gladly reply to your message upon my return on August 15, 2016. Should you
require immediate assitance please contact Celeste Savoie at (506) 471-5290
or by email: Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
Have
a nice day!
Bonjour,
Je suis presentement hors du bureau. Il me
fera plaisir de repondre a votre message a mon retour August 15, 2016. Si
vous avez besoin d'une assitance immediate, veuillez communiquer avec Celeste
Savoie au (506) 471-5290 ou par courriel a: Celeste.Savoie@snb.ca.
Bonne
journee!
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Marc
Richard <MRichard@lawsociety-barreau.nb.ca> Date:
Fri, 18 Jul 2014 17:43:27 +0000 Subject: Automatic reply: Oh My My we just
talked briefly Correct Ms Beaulieu? It appears to me that the latest
President of the NB Law Society thinks non lawyers are not worth talking
to To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I
will be out of the office until July 21, 2014. Je serai absent du bureau
jusqu'au 21 juillet 2014.
> ---------- Forwarded message
---------- > From: David Amos motomaniac333@gmail.com >
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 09:32:09 -0400 > Subject: Attn Integrity
Commissioner Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C., > To: coi@gnb.ca > Cc: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com > >
Good Day Sir > > After I heard you speak on CBC I called your office
again and managed > to speak to one of your staff for the first
time > > Please find attached the documents I promised to send to
the lady who > answered the phone this morning. Please notice that not
after the Sgt > at Arms took the documents destined to your office his pal
Tanker > Malley barred me in writing with an "English" only
document. > > These are the hearings and the dockets in Federal
Court that I > suggested that you study closely. > > This is
the docket in Federal Court > > http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=T-1557-15&select_court=T > >
These are digital recordings of the last three hearings > > Dec
14th https://archive.org/details/BahHumbug > >
January 11th, 2016 https://archive.org/details/Jan11th2015 > >
April 3rd, 2017 > > https://archive.org/details/April32017JusticeLeblancHearing > > >
This is the docket in the Federal Court of Appeal > > http://cas-cdc-www02.cas-satj.gc.ca/IndexingQueries/infp_RE_info_e.php?court_no=A-48-16&select_court=All > > >
The only hearing thus far > > May 24th, 2017 > > https://archive.org/details/May24thHoedown > > >
This Judge understnds the meaning of the word Integrity > > Date:
20151223 > > Docket: T-1557-15 > > Fredericton, New
Brunswick, December 23, 2015 > > PRESENT: The Honourable Mr.
Justice Bell > > BETWEEN: > > DAVID RAYMOND
AMOS > > Plaintiff > > and > > HER MAJESTY
THE QUEEN > > Defendant > > ORDER > >
(Delivered orally from the Bench in Fredericton, New Brunswick, on >
December 14, 2015) > > The Plaintiff seeks an appeal de novo, by way
of motion pursuant to > the Federal Courts Rules (SOR/98-106), from an
Order made on November > 12, 2015, in which Prothonotary Morneau struck
the Statement of Claim > in its entirety. > > At the outset of
the hearing, the Plaintiff brought to my attention a > letter dated
September 10, 2004, which he sent to me, in my then > capacity as Past
President of the New Brunswick Branch of the Canadian > Bar Association,
and the then President of the Branch, Kathleen Quigg, > (now a Justice of
the New Brunswick Court of Appeal). In that letter > he
stated: > > As for your past President, Mr. Bell, may I suggest that
you check the > work of Frank McKenna before I sue your entire law firm
including you. > You are your brother’s keeper. > > Frank
McKenna is the former Premier of New Brunswick and a former > colleague of
mine at the law firm of McInnes Cooper. In addition to > expressing an
intention to sue me, the Plaintiff refers to a number of > people in his
Motion Record who he appears to contend may be witnesses > or potential
parties to be added. Those individuals who are known to > me personally,
include, but are not limited to the former Prime > Minister of Canada, The
Right Honourable Stephen Harper; former > Attorney General of Canada and
now a Justice of the Manitoba Court of > Queen’s Bench, Vic Toews; former
member of Parliament Rob Moore; > former Director of Policing Services,
the late Grant Garneau; former > Chief of the Fredericton Police Force,
Barry McKnight; former Staff > Sergeant Danny Copp; my former colleagues
on the New Brunswick Court > of Appeal, Justices Bradley V. Green and
Kathleen Quigg, and, retired > Assistant Commissioner Wayne Lang of the
Royal Canadian Mounted > Police. > > In the circumstances,
given the threat in 2004 to sue me in my > personal capacity and my past
and present relationship with many > potential witnesses and/or potential
parties to the litigation, I am > of the view there would be a reasonable
apprehension of bias should I > hear this motion. See Justice de
Grandpré’s dissenting judgment in > Committee for Justice and Liberty et
al v National Energy Board et al, > [1978] 1 SCR 369 at p 394 for the
applicable test regarding > allegations of bias. In the circumstances,
although neither party has > requested I recuse myself, I consider it
appropriate that I do so. > > > AS A RESULT OF MY RECUSAL,
THIS COURT ORDERS that the Administrator of > the Court schedule another
date for the hearing of the motion. There > is no order as to
costs. > > “B. Richard Bell” > Judge > > >
Below after the CBC article about your concerns (I made one comment >
already) you will find the text of just two of many emails I had sent > to
your office over the years since I first visited it in 2006. > > I
noticed that on July 30, 2009, he was appointed to the the Court >
Martial Appeal Court of Canada Perhaps you should scroll to the > bottom
of this email ASAP and read the entire Paragraph 83 of my > lawsuit now
before the Federal Court of Canada? > > "FYI This is the text of the
lawsuit that should interest Trudeau the most > > > ----------
Original message ---------- > From: justin.trudeau.a1@parl.gc.ca >
Date: Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 8:18 PM > Subject: Réponse automatique : RE My
complaint against the CROWN in > Federal Court Attn David Hansen and Peter
MacKay If you planning to > submit a motion for a publication ban on my
complaint trust that you > dudes are way past too late > To: david.raymond.amos@gmail.com > >
Veuillez noter que j'ai changé de courriel. Vous pouvez me rejoindre à >
lalanthier@hotmail.com > >
Pour rejoindre le bureau de M. Trudeau veuillez envoyer un courriel à > tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca > >
Please note that I changed email address, you can reach me at > lalanthier@hotmail.com > >
To reach the office of Mr. Trudeau please send an email to > tommy.desfosses@parl.gc.ca > >
Thank you, > > Merci , > > > http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2015/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html > > >
83. The Plaintiff states that now that Canada is involved in more war >
in Iraq again it did not serve Canadian interests and reputation to >
allow Barry Winters to publish the following words three times over > five
years after he began his bragging: > > January 13, 2015 > This
Is Just AS Relevant Now As When I wrote It During The Debate > >
December 8, 2014 > Why Canada Stood Tall! > > Friday, October
3, 2014 > Little David Amos’ “True History Of War” Canadian Airstrikes
And > Stupid Justin Trudeau > > Canada’s and Canadians free
ride is over. Canada can no longer hide > behind Amerka’s and NATO’s
skirts. > > When I was still in Canadian Forces then Prime Minister
Jean Chretien > actually committed the Canadian Army to deploy in the
second campaign > in Iraq, the Coalition of the Willing. This was against
or contrary to > the wisdom or advice of those of us Canadian officers
that were > involved in the initial planning phases of that operation.
There were > significant concern in our planning cell, and NDHQ about of
the dearth > of concern for operational guidance, direction, and forces
for > operations after the initial occupation of Iraq. At the “last
minute” > Prime Minister Chretien and the Liberal government changed its
mind. > The Canadian government told our amerkan cousins that we would
not > deploy combat troops for the Iraq campaign, but would deploy
a > Canadian Battle Group to Afghanistan, enabling our amerkan cousins
to > redeploy troops from there to Iraq. The PMO’s thinking that it
was > less costly to deploy Canadian Forces to Afghanistan than Iraq.
But > alas no one seems to remind the Liberals of Prime Minister
Chretien’s > then grossly incorrect assumption. Notwithstanding Jean
Chretien’s > incompetence and stupidity, the Canadian Army was
heroic, > professional, punched well above it’s weight, and the PPCLI
Battle > Group, is credited with “saving Afghanistan” during the
Panjway > campaign of 2006. > > What Justin Trudeau and the
Liberals don’t tell you now, is that then > Liberal Prime Minister Jean
Chretien committed, and deployed the > Canadian army to Canada’s longest
“war” without the advice, consent, > support, or vote of the Canadian
Parliament. > > What David Amos and the rest of the ignorant,
uneducated, and babbling > chattering classes are too addled to understand
is the deployment of > less than 75 special operations troops, and what is
known by planners > as a “six pac cell” of fighter aircraft is NOT the
same as a > deployment of a Battle Group, nor a “war”
make. > > The Canadian Government or The Crown unlike our amerkan
cousins have > the “constitutional authority” to commit the Canadian
nation to war. > That has been recently clearly articulated to the
Canadian public by > constitutional scholar Phillippe Legasse. What
Parliament can do is > remove “confidence” in The Crown’s Government in a
“vote of > non-confidence.” That could not happen to the Chretien
Government > regarding deployment to Afghanistan, and it won’t happen in
this > instance with the conservative majority in The Commons regarding
a > limited Canadian deployment to the Middle East. > >
President George Bush was quite correct after 911 and the terror > attacks
in New York; that the Taliban “occupied” and “failed state” > Afghanistan
was the source of logistical support, command and control, > and training
for the Al Quaeda war of terror against the world. The > initial defeat,
and removal from control of Afghanistan was vital and > > P.S.
Whereas this CBC article is about your opinion of the actions of > the
latest Minister Of Health trust that Mr Boudreau and the CBC have > had my
files for many years and the last thing they are is ethical. > Ask his
friends Mr Murphy and the RCMP if you don't believe me. > >
Subject: > Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 12:02:35 -0400 > From: "Murphy,
Michael B. \(DH/MS\)" MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca >
To: motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com > >
January 30, 2007 > > WITHOUT PREJUDICE > > Mr. David
Amos > > Dear Mr. Amos: > > This will acknowledge
receipt of a copy of your e-mail of December 29, > 2006 to Corporal Warren
McBeath of the RCMP. > > Because of the nature of the allegations
made in your message, I have > taken the measure of forwarding a copy to
Assistant Commissioner Steve > Graham of the RCMP “J” Division in
Fredericton. > > Sincerely, > > Honourable Michael B.
Murphy > Minister of Health > > CM/cb > > >
Warren McBeath warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca
wrote: > > Date: Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:34:53 -0500 > From:
"Warren McBeath" warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >
To: kilgoursite@ca.inter.net,
MichaelB.Murphy@gnb.ca, >
nada.sarkis@gnb.ca,
wally.stiles@gnb.ca,
dwatch@web.net, >
motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com >
CC: ottawa@chuckstrahl.com,
riding@chuckstrahl.com,John.Foran@gnb.ca, >
Oda.B@parl.gc.ca,"Bev
BUSSON" bev.busson@rcmp-grc.gc.ca, >
"Paul Dube" PAUL.DUBE@rcmp-grc.gc.ca >
Subject: Re: Remember me Kilgour? Landslide Annie McLellan has > forgotten
me but the crooks within the RCMP have not > > Dear Mr.
Amos, > > Thank you for your follow up e-mail to me today. I was on
days off > over the holidays and returned to work this evening. Rest
assured I > was not ignoring or procrastinating to respond to your
concerns. > > As your attachment sent today refers from Premier
Graham, our position > is clear on your dead calf issue: Our forensic labs
do not process > testing on animals in cases such as yours, they are
referred to the > Atlantic Veterinary College in Charlottetown who can
provide these > services. If you do not choose to utilize their expertise
in this > instance, then that is your decision and nothing more can be
done. > > As for your other concerns regarding the US Government,
false > imprisonment and Federal Court Dates in the US, etc... it is
clear > that Federal authorities are aware of your concerns both in
Canada > the US. These issues do not fall into the purvue of
Detachment > and policing in Petitcodiac, NB. > > It was
indeed an interesting and informative conversation we had on > December
23rd, and I wish you well in all of your future endeavors. > >
Sincerely, > > Warren McBeath, Cpl. > GRC Caledonia
RCMP > Traffic Services NCO > Ph: (506) 387-2222 > Fax: (506)
387-4622 > E-mail warren.mcbeath@rcmp-grc.gc.ca > > > >
Alexandre Deschênes, Q.C., > Office of the Integrity Commissioner >
Edgecombe House, 736 King Street > Fredericton, N.B. CANADA E3B
5H1 > tel.: 506-457-7890 > fax: 506-444-5224 > e-mail:coi@gnb.ca >
Mr.
Amos, We acknowledge receipt of your recent emails to the Deputy Minister
of Justice and lawyers within the Legal Services Division of
the Department of Justice respecting a possible claim against the
Province of Nova Scotia. Service of any documents respecting a legal
claim against the Province of Nova Scotia may be served on the
Attorney General at 1690 Hollis Street, Halifax, NS. Please note that we
will not be responding to further emails on this matter.
Sunday,
19 November 2017 Federal Court of Appeal Finally Makes The BIG Decision And
Publishes It Now The Crooks Cannot Take Back Ticket To Try Put My Matter
Before The Supreme Court
BETWEEN: DAVID RAYMOND AMOS Respondent on
the cross-appeal (and formally Appellant) and HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN Appellant on the cross-appeal (and formerly Respondent) Heard at
Fredericton, New Brunswick, on May 24, 2017. Judgment delivered at Ottawa,
Ontario, on October 30, 2017. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY:
THE
COURT
Date: 20171030
Docket: A-48-16 Citation: 2017 FCA
213 CORAM:
WEBB J.A. NEAR J.A. GLEASON
J.A.
BETWEEN: DAVID RAYMOND AMOS Respondent on the
cross-appeal (and formally Appellant) and HER MAJESTY THE
QUEEN Appellant on the cross-appeal (and formerly Respondent) REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT BY THE COURT
I. Introduction
[1]
On September 16, 2015, David Raymond Amos (Mr. Amos) filed a
53-page Statement of Claim (the Claim) in Federal Court against Her Majesty
the Queen (the Crown). Mr. Amos claims $11 million in damages and a public
apology from the Prime Minister and Provincial Premiers for being illegally
barred from accessing parliamentary properties and seeks a declaration from
the Minister of Public Safety that the Canadian Government will no longer
allow the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and Canadian Forces to harass
him and his clan (Claim at para. 96).
[2] On November
12, 2015 (Docket T-1557-15), by way of a motion brought by the Crown, a
prothonotary of the Federal Court (the Prothonotary) struck the Claim in its
entirety, without leave to amend, on the basis that it was plain and obvious
that the Claim disclosed no reasonable claim, the Claim was fundamentally
vexatious, and the Claim could not be salvaged by way of further amendment
(the Prothontary’s Order).
[3] On January 25, 2016
(2016 FC 93), by way of Mr. Amos’ appeal from the Prothonotary’s Order, a
judge of the Federal Court (the Judge), reviewing the matter de novo, struck
all of Mr. Amos’ claims for relief with the exception of the claim for
damages for being barred by the RCMP from the New Brunswick legislature
in 2004 (the Federal Court Judgment).
[4] Mr. Amos
appealed and the Crown cross-appealed the Federal Court Judgment. Further to
the issuance of a Notice of Status Review, Mr. Amos’ appeal was dismissed for
delay on December 19, 2016. As such, the only matter before this Court is the
Crown’s cross-appeal.
II. Preliminary
Matter
[5] Mr. Amos, in his memorandum of fact and law
in relation to the cross-appeal that was filed with this Court on March 6,
2017, indicated that several judges of this Court, including two of the
judges of this panel, had a conflict of interest in this appeal. This was the
first time that he identified the judges whom he believed had a conflict of
interest in a document that was filed with this Court. In his notice of
appeal he had alluded to a conflict with several judges but did not name
those judges.
[6] Mr. Amos was of the view that he did not
have to identify the judges in any document filed with this Court because
he had identified the judges in various documents that had been filed with
the Federal Court. In his view the Federal Court and the Federal Court of
Appeal are the same court and therefore any document filed in the Federal
Court would be filed in this Court. This view is based on subsections 5(4)
and 5.1(4) of the Federal Courts Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7:
5(4)
Every judge of the Federal Court is, by virtue of his or her office, a judge
of the Federal Court of Appeal and has all the jurisdiction, power and
authority of a judge of the Federal Court of Appeal. […]
5(4) Les
juges de la Cour fédérale sont d’office juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale et
ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que les juges de la Cour d’appel
fédérale. […] 5.1(4) Every judge of the Federal Court of Appeal is, by
virtue of that office, a judge of the Federal Court and has all
the jurisdiction, power and authority of a judge of the Federal
Court.
5.1(4) Les juges de la Cour d’appel fédérale sont d’office juges
de la Cour fédérale et ont la même compétence et les mêmes pouvoirs que
les juges de la Cour fédérale.
[7] However, these
subsections only provide that the judges of the Federal Court are also judges
of this Court (and vice versa). It does not mean that there is only one
court. If the Federal Court and this Court were one Court, there would be no
need for this section. [8] Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal
Courts Act provide that: 3 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called
the Federal Court — Appeal Division is continued under the name “Federal
Court of Appeal” in English and “Cour d’appel fédérale” in French. It
is continued as an additional court of law, equity and admiralty in
and for Canada, for the better administration of the laws of Canada and
as a superior court of record having civil and criminal
jurisdiction.
3 La Section d’appel, aussi appelée la Cour d’appel ou la
Cour d’appel fédérale, est maintenue et dénommée « Cour d’appel fédérale »
en français et « Federal Court of Appeal » en anglais. Elle est
maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit, d’equity et d’amirauté
du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du droit canadien, et continue
d’être une cour supérieure d’archives ayant compétence en matière civile et
pénale. 4 The division of the Federal Court of Canada called the Federal
Court — Trial Division is continued under the name “Federal Court”
in English and “Cour fédérale” in French. It is continued as an additional
court of law, equity and admiralty in and for Canada, for the better
administration of the laws of Canada and as a superior court of record having
civil and criminal jurisdiction.
4 La section de la Cour fédérale du
Canada, appelée la Section de première instance de la Cour fédérale, est
maintenue et dénommée « Cour fédérale » en français et « Federal Court » en
anglais. Elle est maintenue à titre de tribunal additionnel de droit,
d’equity et d’amirauté du Canada, propre à améliorer l’application du
droit canadien, et continue d’être une cour supérieure d’archives
ayant compétence en matière civile et pénale.
[9]
Sections 3 and 4 of the Federal Courts Act create two separate courts – this
Court (section 3) and the Federal Court (section 4). If, as Mr. Amos
suggests, documents filed in the Federal Court were automatically also filed
in this Court, then there would no need for the parties to prepare and file
appeal books as required by Rules 343 to 345 of the Federal Courts Rules,
SOR/98-106 in relation to any appeal from a decision of the Federal Court.
The requirement to file an appeal book with this Court in relation to an
appeal from a decision of the Federal Court makes it clear that the only
documents that will be before this Court are the documents that are part of
that appeal book.
[10] Therefore, the memorandum of fact
and law filed on March 6, 2017 is the first document, filed with this Court,
in which Mr. Amos identified the particular judges that he submits have
a conflict in any matter related to him.
[11] On April
3, 2017, Mr. Amos attempted to bring a motion before the Federal Court
seeking an order “affirming or denying the conflict of interest he has” with
a number of judges of the Federal Court. A judge of the Federal Court issued
a direction noting that if Mr. Amos was seeking this order in relation to
judges of the Federal Court of Appeal, it was beyond the jurisdiction of the
Federal Court. Mr. Amos raised the Federal Court motion at the hearing of
this cross-appeal. The Federal Court motion is not a motion before
this Court and, as such, the submissions filed before the Federal
Court will not be entertained. As well, since this was a motion
brought before the Federal Court (and not this Court), any documents filed
in relation to that motion are not part of the record of this
Court.
[12] During the hearing of the appeal Mr. Amos
alleged that the third member of this panel also had a conflict of interest
and submitted some documents that, in his view, supported his claim of
a conflict. Mr. Amos, following the hearing of his appeal, was
also afforded the opportunity to provide a brief summary of the
conflict that he was alleging and to file additional documents that, in
his view, supported his allegations. Mr. Amos submitted several pages
of documents in relation to the alleged conflicts. He organized
the documents by submitting a copy of the biography of the
particular judge and then, immediately following that biography, by
including copies of the documents that, in his view, supported his claim
that such judge had a conflict.
[13] The nature of the
alleged conflict of Justice Webb is that before he was appointed as a Judge
of the Tax Court of Canada in 2006, he was a partner with the law firm
Patterson Law, and before that with Patterson Palmer in Nova Scotia. Mr. Amos
submitted that he had a number of disputes with Patterson Palmer and
Patterson Law and therefore Justice Webb has a conflict simply because he was
a partner of these firms. Mr. Amos is not alleging that Justice Webb
was personally involved in or had any knowledge of any matter in which
Mr. Amos was involved with Justice Webb’s former law firm – only that
he was a member of such firm.
[14] During his oral
submissions at the hearing of his appeal Mr. Amos, in relation to the alleged
conflict for Justice Webb, focused on dealings between himself and a
particular lawyer at Patterson Law. However, none of the documents submitted
by Mr. Amos at the hearing or subsequently related to any dealings with
this particular lawyer nor is it clear when Mr. Amos was dealing with
this lawyer. In particular, it is far from clear whether such dealings
were after the time that Justice Webb was appointed as a Judge of the
Tax Court of Canada over 10 years ago.
[15] The
documents that he submitted in relation to the alleged conflict for Justice
Webb largely relate to dealings between Byron Prior and the St. John’s
Newfoundland and Labrador office of Patterson Palmer, which is not in the
same province where Justice Webb practiced law. The only document that
indicates any dealing between Mr. Amos and Patterson Palmer is a copy of an
affidavit of Stephen May who was a partner in the St. John’s NL office of
Patterson Palmer. The affidavit is dated January 24, 2005 and refers to a
number of e-mails that were sent by Mr. Amos to Stephen May. Mr. Amos also
included a letter that is addressed to four individuals, one of whom is
John Crosbie who was counsel to the St. John’s NL office of
Patterson Palmer. The letter is dated September 2, 2004 and is addressed
to “John Crosbie, c/o Greg G. Byrne, Suite 502, 570 Queen
Street, Fredericton, NB E3B 5E3”. In this letter Mr. Amos alludes to
a possible lawsuit against Patterson Palmer. [16] Mr. Amos’
position is that simply because Justice Webb was a lawyer with Patterson
Palmer, he now has a conflict. In Wewaykum Indian Band v. Her Majesty the
Queen, 2003 SCC 45, [2003] 2 S.C.R. 259, the Supreme Court of Canada noted
that disqualification of a judge is to be determined based on whether there
is a reasonable apprehension of bias: 60 In Canadian law, one
standard has now emerged as the criterion for disqualification. The
criterion, as expressed by de Grandpré J. in Committee for Justice and
Liberty v. National Energy Board, …[[1978] 1 S.C.R. 369, 68 D.L.R. (3d) 716],
at p. 394, is the reasonable apprehension of bias: … the apprehension of
bias must be a reasonable one, held by reasonable and right minded persons,
applying themselves to the question and obtaining thereon the required
information. In the words of the Court of Appeal, that test is "what would an
informed person, viewing the matter realistically and practically -- and
having thought the matter through -- conclude. Would he think that it is more
likely than not that [the decision-maker], whether consciously
or unconsciously, would not decide fairly."
[17] The issue
to be determined is whether an informed person, viewing the matter
realistically and practically, and having thought the matter through, would
conclude that Mr. Amos’ allegations give rise to a reasonable apprehension of
bias. As this Court has previously remarked, “there is a strong presumption
that judges will administer justice impartially” and this presumption will
not be rebutted in the absence of “convincing evidence” of bias (Collins
v. Canada, 2011 FCA 140 at para. 7, [2011] 4 C.T.C. 157 [Collins].
See also R. v. S. (R.D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484 at para. 32, 151
D.L.R. (4th) 193).
[18] The Ontario Court of Appeal in Rando
Drugs Ltd. v. Scott, 2007 ONCA 553, 86 O.R. (3d) 653 (leave to appeal to the
Supreme Court of Canada refused, 32285 (August 1, 2007)), addressed
the particular issue of whether a judge is disqualified from hearing
a case simply because he had been a member of a law firm that was involved
in the litigation that was now before that judge. The Ontario Court of Appeal
determined that the judge was not disqualified if the judge had no
involvement with the person or the matter when he was a lawyer. The Ontario
Court of Appeal also explained that the rules for determining whether a judge
is disqualified are different from the rules to determine whether a lawyer
has a conflict: 27 Thus, disqualification is not the natural corollary
to a finding that a trial judge has had some involvement in a case
over which he or she is now presiding. Where the judge had no
involvement, as here, it cannot be said that the judge is
disqualified.
28 The point can rightly be made that had Mr.
Patterson been asked to represent the appellant as counsel before his
appointment to the bench, the conflict rules would likely have prevented him
from taking the case because his firm had formerly represented one of
the defendants in the case. Thus, it is argued how is it that as a
trial judge Patterson J. can hear the case? This issue was considered by
the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) in Locabail (U.K.) Ltd. v.
Bayfield Properties Ltd., [2000] Q.B. 451. The court held, at para. 58,
that there is no inflexible rule governing the disqualification of a
judge and that, "[e]verything depends on the circumstances."
29
It seems to me that what appears at first sight to be an inconsistency in
application of rules can be explained by the different contexts and in
particular, the strong presumption of judicial impartiality that applies in
the context of disqualification of a judge. There is no such presumption in
cases of allegations of conflict of interest against a lawyer because of a
firm's previous involvement in the case. To the contrary, as explained by
Sopinka J. in MacDonald Estate v. Martin (1990), 77 D.L.R. (4th) 249
(S.C.C.), for sound policy reasons there is a presumption of a
disqualifying interest that can rarely be overcome. In particular, a
conclusory statement from the lawyer that he or she had no
confidential information about the case will never be sufficient. The case is
the opposite where the allegation of bias is made against a trial
judge. His or her statement that he or she knew nothing about the case
and had no involvement in it will ordinarily be accepted at face
value unless there is good reason to doubt it: see Locabail, at para.
19.
30 That brings me then to consider the particular
circumstances of this case and whether there are serious grounds to find
a disqualifying conflict of interest in this case. In my view, there
are two significant factors that justify the trial judge's decision not
to recuse himself. The first is his statement, which all parties
accept, that he knew nothing of the case when it was in his former firm
and that he had nothing to do with it. The second is the long passage
of time. As was said in Wewaykum, at para. 85: To us, one
significant factor stands out, and must inform the perspective of the
reasonable person assessing the impact of this involvement on Binnie J.'s
impartiality in the appeals. That factor is the passage of time. Most
arguments for disqualification rest on circumstances that are either
contemporaneous to the decision-making, or that occurred within a short time
prior to the decision-making. 31 There are other factors that inform
the issue. The Wilson Walker firm no longer acted for any of the parties by
the time of trial. More importantly, at the time of the motion, Patterson J.
had been a judge for six years and thus had not had a relationship
with his former firm for a considerable period of time.
32
In my view, a reasonable person, viewing the matter realistically would
conclude that the trial judge could deal fairly and impartially with this
case. I take this view principally because of the long passage of time and
the trial judge's lack of involvement in or knowledge of the case when the
Wilson Walker firm had carriage. In these circumstances it cannot be
reasonably contended that the trial judge could not remain impartial in the
case. The mere fact that his name appears on the letterhead of some
correspondence from over a decade ago would not lead a reasonable person to
believe that he would either consciously or unconsciously favour his former
firm's former client. It is simply not realistic to think that a judge would
throw off his mantle of impartiality, ignore his oath of office and favour
a client - about whom he knew nothing - of a firm that he left six
years earlier and that no longer acts for the client, in a case
involving events from over a decade ago. (emphasis added)
[19]
Justice Webb had no involvement with any matter involving Mr. Amos while
he was a member of Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law, nor does Mr. Amos
suggest that he did. Mr. Amos made it clear during the hearing of this matter
that the only reason for the alleged conflict for Justice Webb was that he
was a member of Patterson Law and Patterson Palmer. This is simply not enough
for Justice Webb to be disqualified. Any involvement of Mr. Amos
with Patterson Law while Justice Webb was a member of that firm would
have had to occur over 10 years ago and even longer for the time when
he was a member of Patterson Palmer. In addition to the lack of
any involvement on his part with any matter or dispute that Mr. Amos
had with Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer (which in and of itself
is sufficient to dispose of this matter), the length of time since Justice
Webb was a member of Patterson Law or Patterson Palmer would also result in
the same finding – that there is no conflict in Justice Webb hearing this
appeal.
[20] Similarly in R. v. Bagot, 2000 MBCA 30, 145 Man.
R. (2d) 260, the Manitoba Court of Appeal found that there was
no reasonable apprehension of bias when a judge, who had been a member
of the law firm that had been retained by the accused, had no
involvement with the accused while he was a lawyer with that
firm.
[21] In Del Zotto v. Minister of National Revenue, [2000]
4 F.C. 321, 257 N.R. 96, this court did find that there would be
a reasonable apprehension of bias where a judge, who while he was
a lawyer, had recorded time on a matter involving the same person who was
before that judge. However, this case can be distinguished as Justice Webb
did not have any time recorded on any files involving Mr. Amos while he was a
lawyer with Patterson Palmer or Patterson Law.
[22] Mr. Amos
also included with his submissions a CD. He stated in his affidavit dated
June 26, 2017 that there is a “true copy of an American police surveillance
wiretap entitled 139” on this CD. He has also indicated that he has “provided
a true copy of the CD entitled 139 to many American and Canadian law
enforcement authorities and not one of the police forces or officers of the
court are willing to investigate it”. Since he has indicated that this is an
“American police surveillance wiretap”, this is a matter for the American
law enforcement authorities and cannot create, as Mr. Amos suggests,
a conflict of interest for any judge to whom he provides a copy.
[23]
As a result, there is no conflict or reasonable apprehension of bias
for Justice Webb and therefore, no reason for him to recuse
himself.
[24] Mr. Amos alleged that Justice Near’s past
professional experience with the government created a “quasi-conflict” in
deciding the cross-appeal. Mr. Amos provided no details and Justice
Near confirmed that he had no prior knowledge of the matters alleged in
the Claim. Justice Near sees no reason to recuse himself.
[25]
Insofar as it is possible to glean the basis for Mr. Amos’ allegations
against Justice Gleason, it appears that he alleges that she is incapable of
hearing this appeal because he says he wrote a letter to Brian Mulroney and
Jean Chrétien in 2004. At that time, both Justice Gleason and Mr. Mulroney
were partners in the law firm Ogilvy Renault, LLP. The letter in question,
which is rude and angry, begins with “Hey you two Evil Old Smiling Bastards”
and “Re: me suing you and your little dogs too”. There is no indication that
the letter was ever responded to or that a law suit was ever commenced by
Mr. Amos against Mr. Mulroney. In the circumstances, there is no
reason for Justice Gleason to recuse herself as the letter in question
does not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.
III.
Issue
[26] The issue on the cross-appeal is as
follows: Did the Judge err in setting aside the Prothonotary’s Order striking
the Claim in its entirety without leave to amend and in determining that
Mr. Amos’ allegation that the RCMP barred him from the New
Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable of supporting a cause of
action?
IV. Analysis
A. Standard of
Review
[27] Following the Judge’s decision to set aside
the Prothonotary’s Order, this Court revisited the standard of review
to be applied to discretionary decisions of prothonotaries and
decisions made by judges on appeals of prothonotaries’ decisions in
Hospira Healthcare Corp. v. Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, 2016 FCA
215, 402 D.L.R. (4th) 497 [Hospira]. In Hospira, a five-member panel
of this Court replaced the Aqua-Gem standard of review with
that articulated in Housen v. Nikolaisen, 2002 SCC 33, [2002] 2 S.C.R.
235 [Housen]. As a result, it is no longer appropriate for the
Federal Court to conduct a de novo review of a discretionary order made by
a prothonotary in regard to questions vital to the final issue of
the case. Rather, a Federal Court judge can only intervene on appeal
if the prothonotary made an error of law or a palpable and
overriding error in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact
and law (Hospira at para. 79). Further, this Court can only interfere
with a Federal Court judge’s review of a prothonotary’s discretionary
order if the judge made an error of law or palpable and overriding error
in determining a question of fact or question of mixed fact and
law (Hospira at paras. 82-83).
[28] In the case at bar, the
Judge substituted his own assessment of Mr. Amos’ Claim for that of the
Prothonotary. This Court must look to the Prothonotary’s Order to determine
whether the Judge erred in law or made a palpable and overriding error in
choosing to interfere.
B. Did the Judge err in
interfering with the Prothonotary’s Order?
[29] The
Prothontoary’s Order accepted the following paragraphs from the Crown’s
submissions as the basis for striking the Claim in its entirety without leave
to amend:
17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the
Plaintiff addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but
four of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in
2006 in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction
of the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right
of the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province or
provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged does not
give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court. (…)
21.
The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant provide no
details as to the individuals involved or the location of the alleged
incidents or other details sufficient to allow the Defendant to respond. As a
result, it is difficult or impossible to determine the causes of action the
Plaintiff is attempting to advance. A generous reading of the Statement of
Claim allows the Defendant to only speculate as to the true and/or intended
cause of action. At best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized
as: he suspects he is barred from the House of Commons. [footnotes
omitted].
[30] The Judge determined that he could not
strike the Claim on the same jurisdictional basis as the Prothonotary. The
Judge noted that the Federal Court has jurisdiction over claims based on
the liability of Federal Crown servants like the RCMP and that the
actors who barred Mr. Amos from the New Brunswick legislature in
2004 included the RCMP (Federal Court Judgment at para. 23). In
considering the viability of these allegations de novo, the Judge
identified paragraph 14 of the Claim as containing “some precision” as
it identifies the date of the event and a RCMP officer acting
as Aide-de-Camp to the Lieutenant Governor (Federal Court Judgment
at para. 27).
[31] The Judge noted that the 2004 event
could support a cause of action in the tort of misfeasance in public office
and identified the elements of the tort as excerpted from Meigs v.
Canada, 2013 FC 389, 431 F.T.R. 111:
[13] As in both the
cases of Odhavji Estate v Woodhouse, 2003 SCC 69 [Odhavji] and Lewis v
Canada, 2012 FC 1514 [Lewis], I must determine whether the plaintiffs’
statement of claim pleads each element of the alleged tort of misfeasance in
public office:
a) The public officer must have engaged in deliberate and
unlawful conduct in his or her capacity as public officer;
b) The
public officer must have been aware both that his or her conduct was unlawful
and that it was likely to harm the plaintiff; and
c) There must be an
element of bad faith or dishonesty by the public officer and knowledge of
harm alone is insufficient to conclude that a public officer acted in bad
faith or dishonestly. Odhavji, above, at paras 23, 24 and 28 (Federal
Court Judgment at para. 28).
[32] The Judge determined that Mr.
Amos disclosed sufficient material facts to meet the elements of the tort of
misfeasance in public office because the actors, who barred him from the
New Brunswick legislature in 2004, including the RCMP, did so
for “political reasons” (Federal Court Judgment at para. 29).
[33]
This Court’s discussion of the sufficiency of pleadings in Merchant
Law Group v. Canada (Revenue Agency), 2010 FCA 184, 321 D.L.R (4th) 301 is
particularly apt:
…When pleading bad faith or abuse of power, it is not
enough to assert, baldly, conclusory phrases such as “deliberately
or negligently,” “callous disregard,” or “by fraud and theft did
steal”. “The bare assertion of a conclusion upon which the court is
called upon to pronounce is not an allegation of material fact”. Making
bald, conclusory allegations without any evidentiary foundation is an
abuse of process…
To this, I would add that the tort of misfeasance in
public office requires a particular state of mind of a public officer in
carrying out the impunged action, i.e., deliberate conduct which the
public officer knows to be inconsistent with the obligations of his or
her office. For this tort, particularization of the allegations
is mandatory. Rule 181 specifically requires particularization
of allegations of “breach of trust,” “wilful default,” “state of mind of a
person,” “malice” or “fraudulent intention.” (at paras. 34-35, citations
omitted).
[34] Applying the Housen standard of review to
the Prothonotary’s Order, we are of the view that the Judge
interfered absent a legal or palpable and overriding error.
[35]
The Prothonotary determined that Mr. Amos’ Claim disclosed no reasonable
claim and was fundamentally vexatious on the basis of jurisdictional concerns
and the absence of material facts to ground a cause of action. Paragraph 14
of the Claim, which addresses the 2004 event, pleads no material facts as to
how the RCMP officer engaged in deliberate and unlawful conduct, knew that
his or her conduct was unlawful and likely to harm Mr. Amos, and acted in
bad faith. While the Claim alleges elsewhere that Mr. Amos was barred
from the New Brunswick legislature for political and/or malicious
reasons, these allegations are not particularized and are directed
against non-federal actors, such as the Sergeant-at-Arms of the
Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick and the Fredericton Police Force. As
such, the Judge erred in determining that Mr. Amos’ allegation that the
RCMP barred him from the New Brunswick legislature in 2004 was capable
of supporting a cause of action.
[36] In our view, the Claim
is made up entirely of bare allegations, devoid of any detail, such that it
discloses no reasonable cause of action within the jurisdiction of the
Federal Courts. Therefore, the Judge erred in interfering to set aside
the Prothonotary’s Order striking the claim in its entirety. Further,
we find that the Prothonotary made no error in denying leave to amend. The
deficiencies in Mr. Amos’ pleadings are so extensive such that amendment
could not cure them (see Collins at para. 26).
V.
Conclusion [37] For the foregoing reasons, we would allow the
Crown’s cross-appeal, with costs, setting aside the Federal Court
Judgment, dated January 25, 2016 and restoring the Prothonotary’s Order,
dated November 12, 2015, which struck Mr. Amos’ Claim in its
entirety without leave to amend. "Wyman W. Webb" J.A. "David G.
Near" J.A. "Mary J.L. Gleason" J.A.
FEDERAL COURT OF
APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
A CROSS-APPEAL FROM
AN ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SOUTHCOTT DATED JANUARY 25, 2016; DOCKET
NUMBER T-1557-15. DOCKET:
A-48-16
STYLE OF
CAUSE:
DAVID RAYMOND AMOS v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
PLACE
OF HEARING:
Fredericton, New Brunswick
DATE OF
HEARING:
May 24, 2017
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT
BY:
WEBB J.A. NEAR J.A. GLEASON J.A.
DATED:
October
30, 2017
APPEARANCES: David Raymond Amos
For The Appellant
/ respondent on cross-appeal (on his own behalf)
Jan
Jensen
For The Respondent / appELLANT ON
CROSS-APPEAL
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Nathalie G. Drouin Deputy
Attorney General of Canada
John
Williamson - Conservative Nomination Candidate New Brunswick Southwest May 17
at 12:48pm ·
Great news! John Williamson is running for the federal
Conservative nomination in New Brunswick Southwest. He needs your help to
secure the riding and defeat the Trudeau Liberals in 2019.
Having
served as Member of Parliament from 2011-2015, he knows the issues, has
proven ability, and can win: John had the highest Conservative vote — 38.6% —
of all 32 ridings in Atlantic Canada in 2015. It wasn’t enough to get over
the top, but it was a clear signal that his local campaign was
strong.
How can you help? Only current Conservative Party members can
vote for John in the nomination, so please signup or renew your
membership here: https://donate.conservative.ca/membership/
There
are also envelopes that need stuffing, phone calls that need to be made, and
events already planned.
Contact John today by e-mail at VoteJohnW@gmail.com or
call 506-466-8347 to let him know how you can help!
Unsure if your
membership is current? Feel free to contact John and ask. His team can make
sure you’re all set to vote.
And be sure to share and follow this page
for updates on his campaign and to learn about upcoming events.
Go
John! And Vote John W!
Progressive Conservative MLA calls it quits at
provincial level Brian Macdonald won't run again for legislature seat, but
might try federal politics CBC News · Posted: May 28, 2018 6:07 PM AT |
Last Updated: May 28 Brian Macdonald, a Progressive Conservative MLA, has
announced he won't run in the Sept. 24 provincial election. (CBC)
New
Brunswick's Progressive Conservative party is losing one of
its highest-profile MLAs just months before the next provincial
election.
Brian Macdonald says he won't be a candidate this fall and may
instead jump into federal politics.
Calling the last year "my best
year in politics," the two-term MLA said his decision has nothing to do with
PC Leader Blaine Higgs, who beat Macdonald for the party leadership in
2016.
"It's been a really good year," Macdonald said. "I've had a
strong voice in the legislature on issues that are really important to
my heart.
"I also think it can be a challenge being in provincial
politics. It's very small, it's very close, it's very tight, and on a
personal basis, I want to move on."
Macdonald says he’s considering
running for the federal Conservative nomination in New Brunswick Southwest,
which includes part of the riding of Fredericton West-Hanwell, where he has
been the MLA. (CBC)
Macdonald said he's considering running for the
federal Conservative nomination in New Brunswick Southwest, a constituency
that includes part of Macdonald's provincial riding of Fredericton
West-Hanwell.
Health critic slams 'gutting' of top doctor's
office
Blaine Higgs faces internal PC dissent over
appointment
That decision would pit him against former Conservative MP
John Williamson, who announced May 21 he'll also seek the nomination in
the riding he represented from 2011 to 2015. Party members in the
riding will nominate their candidate June 28.
Macdonald said he'll
also consider running federally in Fredericton. The former soldier said he's
also looking at job opportunities with national organizations that advocate
for veterans.
"I'm looking for opportunities and considering a lot of
options," he said.
Blaine Higgs wins N.B. PC leadership race on 3rd
ballot
Tory leadership hopefuls scramble to be 'second choice' of
rivals' supporters
Macdonald is the fifth candidate from the 2016
provincial PC leadership race to opt against running in this year's election
under Higgs.
Macdonald said he is confident he would have won his
riding again and the Tories will win the election Sept. 24, meaning he'd have
a shot of becoming a minister.
But he said being a provincial
politician "does wear on you and it does make you think about what the other
options are. … If I go another four years in provincial politics, it concerns
me that my options would be limited after that."
The 47-year-old also
said the recent death of some friends made him realize he should pursue other
opportunities when he can.
Macdonald's interest in federal politics has
been well-known for years. He was a political assistant to former federal
Defence Minister Peter MacKay and sought the federal Conservative nomination
for Fredericton for the 2008 election.
After failing to win that
nomination, he ran provincially in Fredericton-Silverwood in 2010 and was
elected. He was re-elected in the newly created riding of Fredericton
West-Hanwell in 2014, when he defeated then-NDP leader Dominic
Cardy.
Macdonald ran for the leadership of the New Brunswick
Progressive Conservative Party but lost to Blaine Higgs. (Jacques
Poitras/CBC)
In 2016, Macdonald ran for the PC leadership, placing sixth
on the first ballot out of seven candidates.
Macdonald said he doesn't
think his departure will hurt the provincial party's chances of holding on to
Fredericton West-Hanwell.
"It's going to be very attractive to a number
of high-calibre candidates who are now beginning to come forward," he
said.
Nicky
cannot speak and needs constant care. He's been approved for 11 hours
of home-are support daily but no workers can be found. (Brian Chisholm/CBC)
The
first provincially contracted personal support worker wasn't even
assigned to Nicky until July and lasted just three days. The second one
quit after four.
Nicky Theriault, his mother Colette and the family dog. (Brian Chisholm/CBC )
Theriault's
claims cannot be confirmed. A spokesman for the Department of Social
Development said confidentiality rules forbid the discussion of any case
involving clients.
Dorothy
Shephard, the minister of social development, says the provincial
government is committed to increasing the number of home-care workers by
making the job more attractive. (Brian Chisholm/CBC)
Minister
Dorothy Shephard, the minister of social development, said the new
government is committed to making it more attractive for people to
become personal support workers.
No comments:
Post a Comment