Brady Green says he thinks more about his local candidates when voting in a federal election. (Chad Ingraham/CBC)
Fredericton resident
Brady Green says when he thinks about how he will vote in the upcoming
election, his local candidates are top of mind.
"I think people
should be voting for the person who matters more in their community —
the person who's going to be doing more for … wherever they live," Green
said.
But not everyone feels that way. In Oromocto, Preston
Harper said he doesn't care who is on the ballot locally — his priority
is seeing the federal government switch hands.
Barb
Hammond Roy, who lives in Fredericton, wants the Liberals to stay in
power, feels similarly about her local candidates and she thinks most
others agree.
"People do identify more with Carney than the local people," she said.
Barb
Hammond Roy, left, and Preston Harper, right, might be planning to vote
differently in the upcoming election, but they have something in
common: they will both be thinking more about the federal leaders than
their local candidates. (Chad Ingraham/CBC)
Alex
Marland, a political scientist at Acadia University, said that
according to the research, the majority of Canadians will be thinking on
a national level in a federal election campaign.
Voters will be
most likely thinking about party leaders, the parties themselves and
possibly party-specific issues and policies, he said.
WATCH | What some New Brunswickers say about voting local in a federal race:
Does the name on the ballot really matter?
Alex
Marland, a Nova Scotia-based political scientist, says research shows
voters tend to focus more on policies, the party and the party leader
during a federal election. But there are some cases where a local
candidate could make the difference.
But in terms of local candidates, Marland said it really only makes a difference in close races.
"The problem is, for political parties, they have no idea where the close races are," he said.
"Some
you can tell. So it doesn't make a lot of sense, you know, for the
Conservatives, or frankly, for any party, to spend a lot of resources in
Alberta, where a lot of people are going to vote Conservative.
"But
it does make sense to compete in New Brunswick, because ... election
polling suggests that some of these seats could flip depending on the
amount of local activity."
However, people won't be thinking about their local candidates without being activated to do so, said Marland.
Alex
Marland, a political scientist at Acadia University, says research
shows that the majority of Canadians will be thinking on a national
level in a federal election campaign. (Acadia University)
If
a local candidate is engaging with people — through lawn signs,
donations, volunteering, door-knocking — that may motivate voters to
start giving more thought to the candidate.
In
Atlantic Canada, Marland said people often have deep attachments to
their communities because ridings aren't necessarily as
densely-populated as they are in big cities.
As a result, he said people may have more of a connection with their local candidates.
"If
you're in a big city, let's say Toronto, and you're in a coffee shop,
you can look around the coffee shop, and at any given time, most of
those people are not your constituents," said Marland.
"On the
other hand, if you were to go into a … community store in a rural area
in Atlantic Canada, you're going to go in and you're going to know the
person working behind the counter."
And Marland said research
shows that personal communication has far more of an impact
than communication through "mass media or electronic means."
Some voters might be extra cognizant of the local names on the ballot, while others might be thinking of the bigger picture. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
Marland
said it's not likely someone will shift their party allegiance in order
to vote for a local candidate they like or know personally.
"If
local candidate factors really mattered, we would see far more Canadians
being predisposed to voting independent," said Marland.
"Because
… even if you like the local candidate, if somebody is with a political
party, they're still beholden to that party's kind of demands and
restrictions on what they can do in terms of advocacy.
"So you
might like playing darts with somebody, but if they get elected with a
party, they can't really represent you the same way an independent can."
Hannah
Rudderham is a reporter with CBC New Brunswick. She grew up in Cape
Breton, N.S., and moved to Fredericton in 2018. You can send story tips
to hannah.rudderham@cbc.ca.
Brandon Ellis, Vote for the MP who listens and understands.
Primary Goals:
• Bring Prosperity Back
• Guard your freedoms
• Energy Independence
• Smarter Government Spending
• Food Security & Support Farmers
• Lower Taxes for everyday Canadians
"Our Money, Our Province, Our Choice"
Fair Trade for Canadians:
🤝Unite Through Trade | Remove provincial barriers and make sure families, workers, and small businesses benefit, not just big corporations.
Safeguard Freedom:
🛡️Freedom Over Fear | Support the MP who stands against government overreach, protects your privacy, defends free speech, and upholds the Charter of Rights and Freedoms—because "Freedom isn’t Free" and losing it costs more than we can afford.
National Food Security:
🥕Feed Every Family | Strengthen Canadian agriculture, build sustainable food systems, and ensure every family has access to healthy, affordable food.
Say No to Bug Burgers:
🚫Presidents Choice Cricket Powder™
🦗The Crickets are Coming | Reject insect protein and stand for clean, natural nutrition by protecting whole foods and Canadian farmers.
Making Every Dollar Count:
💰Smarter Spending, Stronger Canada | Support responsible budgeting that invests in healthcare, education, and social programs—while ensuring transparency in foreign investment and protecting Canada’s economic future.
Affordable Living:
🏘️ Lower Bills, Better Lives | Support real solutions that lower the cost of living—by building more affordable homes, cutting red tape, and putting Canadian families ahead of foreign investors in the housing market.
Government Oversight:
🕵️Eyes on Ottawa | Keep Government Accountable with strong oversight through committees, audits, and public inquiries to ensure transparency, prevent waste, and protect the integrity of our institutions.
Federal Legislation:
📜Canada Guards | Support strong legislation that protects our rights, guides fair taxation, promotes peace, and ensures a secure, sustainable future for all Canadians.
Advocacy and Representation:
🗣️Being Approachable | Support leadership that listens, understands, and speaks up for fair taxation, smart spending, and policies that reflect the needs of real people—not lobbyists.
Innovation and Energy Independence:
⚡1.21 Gigawatts! | Invest in clean energy and new technology to make Canada energy independent, cut foreign reliance, and protect our environment for future generations.
Green
Party candidate Pam Allen-LeBlanc, left, and co-leader Elizabeth May
pitched their party as one that's been proven to win in Fredericton. (Silas Brown/CBC)
Greens
are hoping voters in Fredericton will look fondly on the past as
the party pushes to make climate change a more prominent part of
political debate.
Fredericton's Green experience was
mentioned throughout a speech Thursday by Elizabeth May, the Green
co-leader, during a campaign stop in the city.
But one of the brightest moments in that history was cause for a slight awkwardness at the event.
Jenica Atwin made history when she became the first Green MP from New Brunswick, elected in Fredericton in 2019. Then Atwin crossed the floor to join the Liberals in 2021 and was subsequently re-elected.
Jenica Atwin, MP for Fredericton, was first elected as a Green but joined the Liberals two years later. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
On Thursday, May and others spoke of the Green Party's fleeting success in the riding without ever referring to Atwin by name.
"We
made history here by electing a Green in 2019," said Pam Allen-LeBlanc,
the party's local candidate in the election coming up April 28. "The
time is right for Fredericton-Oromocto to send a Green to Ottawa again."
About
40 people, including some Green candidates, gathered for an hour of
speeches peppered with jokes and jabs at opposition parties before a
lively crowd.
May spoke of how her party is an effective
opposition party that would bring the climate and Indigenous
reconciliation back into the national conservation, something she said
the Liberals and Conservatives were failing to do so.
"The
reality of this election … is profoundly disturbing. There are a number
of things that are [missing], just gone from the conversation."
WATCH | Green Party supporters gather in Fredericton:
Elizabeth May hopes to spark Green Party rebound in Fredericton
The party co-leader hopes to capitalize on wins in the area at both the provincial and federal levels in recent years.
She cited the wildfires in Western Canada last summer and a heat wave that killed 619 in British Columbia in 2021 to illustrate the threat Canada faces from climate change.
With
the United States becoming more of a threat, May also spoke in favour
of removing inter-provincial trade barriers and making a national
renewable energy grid.
She and Allen-LeBlanc cited New
Brunswick Green Party Leader David Coon and fellow Green MLA Megan
Mitton as examples of what the party can achieve in the province.
"Even a small caucus can make a difference," Allen-LeBlanc said as she championed the provincial party.
Green MLA Megan Mitton told party supporters that Greens can win in New Brunswick, but it takes work. (Silas Brown/CBC)
In
her own speech, Mitton said Greens can be elected in New Brunswick, but
they have to put in the work during a campaign. She noted that she won
her first term representing Sackville with a margin of just 11 votes.
"Greens can't just walk in, we have to build."
In
an interview, Allen-LeBlanc said she was hearing cost-of-living
concerns most often while door knocking in the riding, but calls
for more policing and for addressing homelessness and drug addiction
also come up.
"They're angry with the Liberal Party,
they're angry with the Conservative Party because they're just almost
helpless," she said.
Mary Hartt of Fredericton said it
was Coon who first won her over to the party and then she felt the same
appreciation of May, who first became the natonal leader in 2006 and
lately has been co-leader with Jonathan Pedneault.
Hartt
said she liked may's support for breaking interprovincial trade
barriers and her efforts to bring a climate-change response front and
centre.
"We have to breakdown those barriers between the
provinces. Alberta is not autonomous. Quebec is not autonomous. We're
our one country."
Mark Dunphy, retired firefighter who lives near Mactaquac, said he worries about the dangers of pipelines.
Mark Dunphy said he supports the Greens because he's worried about pipeline safety. (Silas Brown/CBC)
"I
don't want to take jobs away from the fellas in Saint John because
they're hardworking individuals down there … but we live in a province
that's covered in water," Dunphy said.
"How are they going to get it in here, because pipelines break just as much as anything else."
Party runs 'paper candidates' for half of N.B.
The Green Party is running candidates in eight of the 10 New Brunswick ridings.
But
in half of those ridings — Beauséjour, Fundy Royal, Miramichi-Grand
Lake and Saint John-St. Croix — the party is running what it calls paper
candidates. Their biographies and photos are absent from the Green
website, and party organizers will not make any of them available for
interviews with reporters.
When asked why, May said the timing of the election call was a challenge.
On
the Green Party website, half the New Brunswick candidates have no
photos or biographies, and the party will not make them available for
interviews. (Green Party of Canada)
"If
we had had the fixed election date of October 2025, every single riding
in New Brunswick would have someone giving it their all with a team of
volunteers that are fresh people," May said.
In Fredericton-Oromocto,
Allen-LeBlanc is running against Conservative Brian MacDonald, Liberal
David Myles, New Democrat Nicki Lyons-Macfarlane, Dominic Cardy of the
Canadian Future Party, Brandon Ellis of the Centrist Party, June
Patterson of the Communist Party and Heather Michaud of the People's
Party of Canada.
Sam
Farley is a Fredericton-based reporter at CBC New Brunswick. Originally
from Boston, he is a journalism graduate of the University of King's
College in Halifax. He can be reached at sam.farley@cbc.ca
Standing
up for healthy and prosperous communities. Canada First. Christian,
Mother, Small business Owner, Author, Health and Resilience Speaker,
Black Belt Martial Artist
The PPC now has a powerful ally in its corner: Frank Stronach, the billionaire founder of Magna International. Last Sunday, the People’s Party of Canada held a rally in Uxbridge, Ont., attended by about 100 supporters. PPC Leader Maxime Bernier was there, as was the PPC candidate for the riding of York-Durham, Patricia Conlin, and a gaggle of other PPC candidates. Patricia Conlin, PPC Candidate DurhamPeople's Party of CanadaMaxime BernierMagnaInternational
Auto tycoon Frank Stronach returns to Toronto court on historic sex assault charges
Frank Stronach’s preliminary
hearing starts Friday at 10 Armoury Street. There will be a publication
ban on the evidence. He will be there with his lawyer Leora Shemesh.
Magna auto parts magnate Frank Stronach arrives at the Toronto courthouse on Friday morning.
Frank
Stronach, right, founder of Magna International, is shown with his
daughter, Belinda, at the company's annual general meeting of
shareholders in Toronto on May 1, 2008. A judge’s decision is looming on
whether to compel the Stronach Group to disclose evidence of any
coverup of sexual misconduct. (Mike Cassese/Reuters)
An Ontario
judge's looming decision on whether to compel the Stronach Group to
disclose evidence of any coverup of sexual misconduct may add yet a new
dimension to a deepening scandal surrounding the multinational's
billionaire founder.
The civil court case also offers a
peek into the deep divisions at the heart of a family feud involving
auto parts tycoon Frank Stronach's adult children and grandchildren.
According to at least one longtime observer, the conflict bears a resemblance to the infighting involving another famous clan.
"There are a lot of parallels to the fictional family in Succession," said Dimitry Anastakis, a University of Toronto professor and business historian.
The
popular HBO drama series portrayed members of the mega-rich Roy family —
usually in lavish surroundings — as they battled for control of a media
conglomerate led by an aging patriarch.
Cast
members of the HBO series Succession pose together at the 75th
Primetime Emmy Awards in Los Angeles in January. According to at least
one longtime observer, the conflict in the Stronach family bears a
resemblance to the infighting involving the TV show's Roy clan. (Aude Guerrucci/Reuters)
Like
Logan Roy's fictional rags-to-riches tale, the Austrian-born
Stronach built a successful business empire after immigrating to Canada.
But recent criminal accusations threaten to consume the 91-year-old's
legacy.
In June, Peel Regional Police, near
Toronto, laid 13 charges against Stronach, including sexual assault,
rape and forcible confinement. The charges stem from alleged incidents
involving 10 accusers, from 1977 to this past February.
In an interview with CBC's The Fifth Estate earlier
this week, Stronach denied wrongdoing. He said he would prove the
criminal allegations amounted to "lies" and suggested that the
complainants were motivated by money.
Still, the charges — and media reports
suggesting corporate assets may have helped facilitate sexual
misconduct — prompted one of Stronach's granddaughters, Selena Stronach,
to probe for answers.
Granddaughter takes on Stronach Group
Already
locked in a long-standing legal battle over family riches, the lawyers
for 23-year-old Selena filed a new motion, alleging "it is likely that
records exist which reveal a pattern of misconduct by Mr. Stronach that
includes corporate knowledge and, potentially, facilitation and
coverup."
Frank Stronach initially made a fortune from Magna
International, the auto parts manufacturer he launched in 1957. He later
spun off subsidiaries specializing in horse racing and entertainment
that now fall under the Stronach Group. Frank Stronach is no longer
directly involved in either firm.
Selena Stronach's lawyers
recently asked a judge to order Stronach Group executives, including her
aunt, Belinda, to hand over any documents — such as non-disclosure
agreements and payment records — related to sexual misconduct complaints
against Frank Stronach.
WATCH | Stronach's granddaughter seeks files related to misconduct claims:
Frank Stronach’s granddaughter seeks files related to misconduct claims
An
Ontario court is hearing arguments in a civil suit filed by billionaire
Frank Stronach’s 23-year-old granddaughter, who is seeking access to
company documents related to sexual misconduct allegations against
Stronach, and to possible hush-money payments.
The
motion is part of a broader civil suit brought by Selena and her
father, Andrew Stronach, who claim Belinda and others have mismanaged
the family fortune. The case is scheduled to go to trial next month.
Anastakis, the business historian, said the civil suit is about more than the family's multibillion-dollar fortune.
"I
think at stake is as much legacy issues as it is financial futures and
fortunes," he said, adding the second- and third-generation Stronachs
are likely keen to distance themselves from the patriarch's tarnished
reputation.
Accounts detailing the youngest Stronach's lifestyle vary.
As
of 2021, Selena shared a 15,000-square-foot home in Aurora, Ont., north
of Toronto, with her mother, Kathleen, on the Stronach farm, where
Selena also kept cattle. According to court filings, she blamed Belinda
for cutting off funding for renovations, which left the residence with
incomplete plumbing, loose wiring and unfinished walls and without "a
functional kitchen for years."
Belinda Stronach's lawyers called
the description of Selena's living arrangements "absurd." They said the
young woman had used a family trust to buy a luxury home in Vancouver
when she was 19.
According to a 2019 article in Toronto Life magazine,
Selena's lawyers once acknowledged she was "raised in an environment in
which no event, experience, consumer purchase or travel has been
denied."
Court documents suggest Andrew Stronach "owns over 100 properties" in Canada and the United States.
WATCH | Frank Stronach says accusers are motivated by money:
Frank Stronach says his accusers are motivated by money
WARNING:
Video contains distressing details | As a woman accusing Frank Stronach
of rape publicly details her allegations, the billionaire businessman
speaks for the first time to CBC’s The Fifth Estate. Stronach says he
has nothing to hide and that his accusers are after his money.
Stronachs let lawyers talk in court
On
Thursday, at least 14 lawyers representing the family's warring
factions crowded into a downtown Toronto courtroom for an all-day
hearing on Selena's motion.
While Belinda's children, equestrian Nicole Walker and globetrotting DJ Frank Walker, live relatively public lives, their cousin has shied away from the spotlight.
An
online search reveals so few images of Selena, journalists in the
courtroom on Thursday whispered to each other, wondering whether a young
woman with dark hair in a back corner of the courtroom could be her.
It wasn't. None of the Stronachs followed the proceedings in person.
The
youngest Stronach's lawyer even declined to say whether Selena could be
seen in a photo taken last year at a company-owned thoroughbred
horse-racing complex in Florida.
Selena
Stronach's lawyer, Matthew Gottlieb, addresses Justice Peter Osborne in
the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Toronto on Thursday. (Alexandra Newbould/CBC)
"I can neither confirm nor deny," Matthew Gottlieb said when a reporter showed him the photo and asked whether the caption was correct in identifying his client.
Addressing
Ontario Superior Court Justice Peter Osborne, Gottlieb insisted that if
the Stronach Group paid to cover up complaints against the family
patriarch, CEO Belinda Stronach and her predecessor, Alon Ossip, surely
would have known.
Ossip's lawyer, Mark Gelowitz, dismissed the claims as a "cascade of conjecture."
"This
is a tactical attempt by Selena to introduce these allegations against
Belinda and Alon in order to embarrass them in a case that has attracted
the attention of the media," Gelowitz told the court.
Belinda
Stronach — a former Conservative MP for Newmarket—Aurora who was once
best known for crossing the floor in 2005 to join the Liberal cabinet —
is no stranger to legal battles within the family.
Thomas
is a CBC News reporter based in Toronto. In recent years, he has
covered some of the biggest stories in the world, from the 2015 Paris
attacks to the Tokyo Olympics and the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II.
He's reported from the Lac-Mégantic rail disaster, the Freedom Convoy
protest in Ottawa and the Pope's visit to Canada aimed at reconciliation
with Indigenous people. Thomas can be reached at thomas.daigle@cbc.ca.
Commentary from Chambers, Benchmark and
our clients states that Matt — “… ranks among the market’s leading trial
lawyers,” and “… is a prominent figure in Toronto's commercial
litigation market. He is particularly respected for his insolvency
disputes practice ... has a well-deserved reputation for his advocacy
skills." And that "Matthew Gottlieb is an excellent lawyer." Matt was
named “Lawyer of the Year” in Bet-the-Company Litigation by Best Lawyers
2022 and is ranked as one of the Top 50 Trial Lawyers in Canada by
Benchmark Litigation.
This
document is a statement of defence filed by Alon Ossip in response to a
statement of claim by Frank Stronach and Elfriede Stronach. Alon admits
some allegations in the statement of claim and denies others. He
provides background on his long career working for Frank Stronach and
various Stronach family businesses. He asserts that Frank's business
judgment has declined and led to financial issues. Alon argues he has
acted properly and fulfilled all duties, building substantial wealth for
the Stronach family, and that the allegations against him are without
foundation.
Original Description:
Ontario Superior Court of Justice (Commercial List): Court File No. CV-18-606163-00CL
STRONACH FAMILY RIFT REVEALED IN BOMBSHELL LAWSUIT
Belinda and Frank Stronach photos
By Bill Finley and T. D. Thornton
A
bitter and divisive power struggle that has been simmering behind the
scenes for years within the Stronach family is about to boil over very
publicly in a court of law.
Frank
Stronach, the 86-year-old Canadian business titan who is renowned
within the Thoroughbred industry as a breeder and owner of racehorses
and for building North America's largest conglomerate of racetracks,
filed a bombshell lawsuit in a Toronto court Oct. 1 alleging that the
daughter he appointed to run his empire, Belinda Stronach, has
mismanaged the family's chief assets and trust funds while forcing her
father out of control of the fortune he created.
Belinda
Stronach, 52, is the chairman and president of The Stronach Group
(TSG), which operates, among numerous other holdings, Santa Anita Park,
Golden Gate Fields, Gulfstream Park, Laurel Park, Pimlico Race Course
and Portland Meadows. According to the lawsuit, she has also been a
trustee of three family trusts and a beneficiary of one of them.
Alon
Ossip, the chief executive of TSG, is named as a co-defendant. His
role, according to the lawsuit, involves allegedly conspiring with
Belinda Stronach in Aa series of covert and unlawful actionsYthat have
been contrary to the best interests of, and to the overwhelming
detriment of, other members of the Stronach family.
The
73-page lawsuit, which TDN obtained from the Ontario Superior Court of
Justice, lists 39 demands for relief that Frank Stronach is seeking via
court trial, including the removal of Belinda Stronach and Ossip from
all corporate officer and trustee positions related to the Stronach
empire.
Cont. p3
According to the suit, Frank Stronach is also seeking three separate forms of financial redress:
$
$250 million (CDN) in compensation to the plaintiffs, family trusts,
and TSG entities for all losses, damages or harm suffered as a result of
the Defendants= unlawful or oppressive conduct.
$
$250 million (CDN) in damages against Belinda and Alon for breach of
fiduciary duty, breach of trust, and unlawful means of conspiracy.
$ $20 million (CDN) in Apunitive, aggravated, and/or exemplary damages against Belinda Stronach and Ossip.
At
the heart of the proceeding lies a series of unlawful actions
undertaken by Belinda, together with Alon and others associated with
them, to appropriate Stronach family assets for their own personal
benefit, the suit contends. Belinda and Alon appropriated control over
the business and assets of TSG after having concealed their actions
from Frank [and other family members] during the period from at least
2011 to November 2016 when Belinda and Alon took the position, for the
first time, that Frank was no longer in control of, and had no role in
running, the family empire.
The
lawsuit alleges a complete break down of relationships within the
Stronach family as a result of the ongoing strife. Frank's wife,
Elfriede, is named as a co-plaintiff. Two of Frank Stronach's
grandchildren, Nicole and Frank Walker, ages 25 and 27, respectively,
are also named as co-defendants. They are Belinda Stronach's children,
and both served as trustees of family assets from 2013-17, according to
the suit. Cont. p4
Two
Wednesday phone messages left with Belinda Stronach's assistants at
TSG's Ontario offices did not yield comments in time for this story's
deadline.
Ossip's attorney,
Mark Gelowitz, confirmed via email that his client has authorized a
spokesperson, Paul Deegan, to issue the following statement:
These allegations are baseless and are not grounded in fact or reality. Alon has always honored his obligations and acted in good faith to preserve and grow the Stronach family's assets and to protect the interests of all members of the family. Alon created huge wealth for the family, and he has always operated in a prudent and commercially sensible manner. Frank Stronach was a great auto parts entrepreneur, but his recent excessive spending and numerous failed ventures put his family=s wealth at risk. This is a dispute between Stronach family members that should be resolved between family members.
The rags-to-riches rise of the Austrian-born Frank Stronach is well known within the racing industry, and he has been honored with numerous awards during his ascent from a small-scale Ontario horse owner and breeder to a global Thoroughbred power player. Over the course of six decades, he concurrently enjoyed commercial success as an auto-parts magnate, and several of his early racing holdings were intertwined with that firm, Magna International.
As Frank Stronach's scope and scale of investment within Thoroughbred racing grew, he formed Magna Entertainment Corporation (MEC) in 1999 to keep his racing interests separate from the automotive business.
Belinda Stronach came on board with MEC in 2001 as its chief executive, although she briefly stepped away shortly thereafter for a run in Canadian politics.
Over the decades, as his wealth grew, Frank Stronach formed various trusts to share the fortune with family members.
According
to the suit, even though other family members were eventually named as
trustees, it was understood that the patriarch would always retain Super
Trustee status.
All
members of the family, including Belinda, understood and agreed that
Frank would maintain control of the family business as the creator of
the family's wealth, the suit contends.
By
the first decade of the 21st century, MEC began morphing into TSG,
which is described in the suit as Aa complex network of 253 Stronach
family-owned corporations, trusts, and other entities established in
various jurisdictions around the world.
By
2013, Frank Stronach assumed the title of TSG's founder and honorary
chairman, while Belinda Stronach and Ossip took on greater day-to-day
executive powers within the company. Ossip, according to the suit, was
paid a $1 million annual salary and was given roughly 5% interest in
certain TSG assets.
Cont. p5
From
virtually the moment this arrangement was entered into, Alon failed to
fulfill his most basic obligations as CEO of TSG, the suit alleges.
Instead, he breached repeatedly his legal equitable and fiduciary
duties.
In September 2013,
Frank Stronach stepped away from his racing ventures and resigned
leadership positions with two family trusts in order to fulfill a
lifelong goal of leading a party that would get elected to the Austrian
Parliament. His party got voted in, but by January 2014 he resigned from
its active leadership and returned to Ontario to re-immerse himself in
TSG, assuming that everything was business as usual. But according to
Frank Stronach's version of events detailed in the lawsuit, it wasn't.
Frank
later learned that during this period, Belinda and Alon seriously
neglected the business of TSG and [had] abused their positions of
authority, the suit states. They did so in order to conceal significant
cash flow issues, and to favour their own personal interests at the
direct expense of rights and interests of other members of the Stronach
family.
In fact, the suit
contends, it wasn't until November 2016 that, Belinda and Alon informed
Frank for the first time that TSG was facing significant liquidity
issues. This came as a surprise to Frank and raised red flags about
their management of TSG.
The
suit then details a litany of alleged power plays initiated by Belinda
Stronach and Ossip, including their refusal to let Frank Stronach act
on routine business transactions. Belinda and Alon were confrontational,
disrespectful andinsubordinate, the suit alleges. They demanded that
Frank take steps to rein in or terminate all expenditures and
investments being made by him on behalf of TSGY. Belinda and Alon also
took the position, for the first time, that Frank had no authority to
act in the name of any of the businesses owned or operated by TSGY. They
asserted that Frank had no signing authority or ability to access
corporate funds.
Ossip,
according to the suit, also threatened to fire any TSG employees who
carried out orders from Frank Stronach. Alon belittled and embarrassed
Frank, and did so with the blessing and encouragement of Belinda, the
suit contends.
Eventually,
Frank Stronach insisted to his daughter that Ossip be terminated. The
suit alleges that Belinda Stronach only paid lip service to her father's
request, telling him that Ossip would be suspended and play no further
role in TSG business, when in reality, the two allegedly Acollaborated
covertly to keep Frank Stronach from figuring out that Ossip was still
actively involved.
The suit
alleges that Frank Stronach then began making repeated requests to see
documentation about TSG's finances, but for well over a year, Belinda
stonewalled and deflected Frank and his advisors.
Cont. p6
On
Jan. 9, 2017, Frank Stronach reappointed himself to several family
trusts, taking over control from his two grandchildren. The next day,
Belinda Stronach fired back, saying it was not legal for him to do so.
And
on Jan. 15, 2017, Belinda once again wrote to Frank, and stated that
she would not allow him to take control of the family business, the suit
contends.
Over the course
of the next year, according to the suit, Frank Stronach tried to
reconcile the family fiasco as best as he could without bringing the
entire affair before a court of law. But the suit contends that strategy
hasn't worked, and that Belinda Stronach to this day continues to
dismantle and sell off other [non-racing] assets that form part of the Stronach family empire.
Among
Belinda Stronach's alleged malfeasances, the suit contends, are demands
for distributions from the family trusts, the hiring of unqualified
friends to fill TSG positions at exorbitant salaries, and the submission
of bogus TSG reimbursement requests for hundreds of thousands of
dollars in personal expenses associated with parties, vacations for
Belinda and her children, limousine rides and expensive meals, none of
which related to legitimate business expenses.
The defendants have 20 days from the date the suit was initiated to file a response with the court.
Thursday, October 11, 2018 TWIRLING CANDY FILLY HEADING TO BC8 Ashbrook Farm and BBN Racing'sConcrete Rose(Twirling Candy), stretching out off an impressive debut win at Saratoga, had no issue with two turns and blew her competition away in the GII JPMorgan Chase Jessamine S. Wednesday at Keeneland.
PUBLISHER & CEO Sue Morris Finley @suefinley suefinley@thetdn.com V.P., INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS Gary King @garykingTDN garyking@thetdn.com EDITORIAL editor@thetdn.com Editor-in-Chief Jessica Martini @JessMartiniTDN Managing Editor Alan Carasso @EquinealTDN Senior Editor Steve Sherack @SteveSherackTDN Racing Editor Brian DiDonato @BDiDonatoTDN News and Features Editor Ben Massam @BMassamTDN Associate Editors Christie DeBernardis @CDeBernardisTDN Joe Bianca @JBiancaTDN ADVERTISING advertising@thetdn.com Director of Advertising Alycia Borer Advertising Manager Lia Best Advertising Designer Amanda Crelin Advertising Assistants Alexa Reisfield Amie Morosco Advertising Assistant/Dir. of Distribution Rachel McCaffrey Photo Editor Sarah K. Andrew @SarahKAndrew photos@thetdn.com Social Media Strategist Justina Severni Director of Customer Service Vicki Forbes customerservice@thetdn.com Marketing Manager Alayna Cullen @AlaynaCullen Director of Information Technology Ray Villa rayvilla@thetdn.com Bookkeeper Terry May media.vista@verizon.net WORLDWIDE INFORMATION International Editor Kelsey Riley @kelseynrileyTDN kelseynriley@thetdn.com European Editor Emma Berry emmaberry@thetdn.com Associate International Editor Heather Anderson @HLAndersonTDN Newmarket Bureau, Cafe Racing Sean Cronin & Tom Frary caferacing@thetdn.com 60 Broad Street, Suite 100 Red Bank, NJ 07701 732-747-8060 | 732-747-8955 (fax) www.TheTDN.com
According
to a report, top thoroughbred owner Michael Gill is livid. The
Pennsylvania Horse Racing Commission has lifted its ban on the
controversial owner, but the move has come after he has sold his horses
and stepped
away from the industry.
This past February, Gill and his trainer, Tony Adamo, were barred
from racing horses at Penn National Race Course after jockeys and
trainers refused to enter races in which Gill had a horse participating.
The position taken by the jockeys and trainers was that they feared
Gill's horses breaking down and hurting others during the races.
"I have a family, I have kids and no job and I didn't do anything
wrong, or at least I haven't been told what I did wrong," Adamo said
during an interview with fox43.com. The trainer is now allowed to race once again, but virtually all of his stock he had to work with is now gone.
In regard to being cleared once he had sold off all of his stock,
Gill said: "When I'm all out of business, only have a couple of horses
left, what? Everybody's innocent? No one did anything wrong? No
findings? How corrupt is that?"
According
to a report, a federal judge in the United States has ruled that
thoroughbred horse owner Michael Gill and trainer Anthony Adamo can sue
racing commissioners in Pennsylvania in regard to having been banned
from running their horses at Penn National Race Course
in early 2010.
An article on courthousenews.com states that Adamo and Gill
cited civil rights violations in their suit against six past and present
officials with the Pennsylvania Horse Racing Commission.
According to the report, the commission had banned the duo on the
basis that they were racing horses which were unsound and thus
dangerous. The commission had also taken the position that the pair
could not present a feasible civil rights claim based on the merits of
due process because as licensees they did not hold property rights (the
commission took the position that the licenses were a privilege, not a
right).
U.S. District Judge Sylvia Rambo did not agree.
"Defendants' argument that the language of the statute expressly
precludes a procedural due process claim is somewhat perplexing in light
of the hearing rights guaranteed to a licensee facing ejection," Rambo
wrote. She went on to say, "The state law has engendered a clear
expectation of continued enjoyment of the licenses absent proof of
culpable conduct by plaintiffs. This is enough to create a property
interest in plaintiffs' licenses, notwithstanding the statutory language
to the contrary."
In January, 2010, twenty-five jockeys at Penn National Race Course
banded together and refused to ride in races in which Gill-owned horses
were participating. The jockeys stated that the form of the Gill-owned
horses were putting them at risk. A number of Gill's horses had been
euthanized after having been involved in accidents over the Penn
National course.
"You cannot believe how worried we are for our own safety and the
safety of all the horses," jockey Thomas Clifton was quoted as saying
afterward.
"I tell everybody: They can go to my farm, my barn, they can inspect
every one of my horses," Gill was quoted as saying. "I never ask for any
special treatment. All I ask for is to be treated fairly."
ETOBICOKE,
Ontario – Owner, breeder, and former racing executive Don Amos died at
age 73 on Feb. 8 at the Sheridan Villa in Mississauga, Ontario.
Amos, a native of Barrie, Ontario, was the Ontario Jockey Club’s vice
president of Woodbine Sales prior to joining Magna International in
1984. He was eventually appointed as chief operating officer of Magna
Entertainment, before retiring from the company in 2006.
Amos owned and bred Swingin On Ice, who captured the Grade 2 Beaumont Stakes at Keeneland in 1999 for trainer Josie Carroll.
A private funeral and celebration of Amos’ life will be held at a
later date. Memorial donations may be made to the Sheridan Villa, the
Long Run Thoroughbred Adoption Society, or the Alzheimer’s Society.
Alon Ossip stepped down as chief executive officer of Stronach Group, making way for Belinda Stronach, seven months after her family agreed to settle a long and public feud.
Ossip “had been on a leave of absence since January 2017, so his formal resignation
was the next logical step and came as no surprise,” the company said in a statement
Friday. The terms of Ossip’s departure by “mutual agreement” are confidential, the company said.
Patriarch Frank will control one portion while second part will be under control of daughter Belinda
The Canadian Press ·
Belinda
Stronach, left, has been part of an acrimonious and public rift with
her father Frank, right, over control of the family's fortune and
business interests. (Frank Gunn/Canadian Press)
A high-profile feud among members of the Stronach family has been settled.
Under a settlement announced by The Stronach Group, control of the family fortune is basically split between two factions.
Former
politician and business executive Belinda Stronach will remain
chairwoman and president of The Stronach Group, with full control of its
horse racing, gaming, real estate and related assets.
Her
Austrian-born parents, Frank and Elfriede Stronach, will assume full
ownership and control of a stallion and breeding business, all farm
operations in North America and all European assets.
The family
fortune was founded by Frank Stronach, who built the global Magna
automotive manufacturing business — where Belinda worked for a time
before entering federal politics.
Father and daughter issued a joint statement saying they were glad their disagreements had been settled.
On
a cold grey morning last April, Ontario Superior Court judge Glenn A.
Hainey held a routine scheduling hearing in his chambers on University
Avenue. One by one, the country’s most high-powered corporate litigators
filed into the room. There were friendly handshakes, there was
collegial kibitzing, there was even some jovial laughter. It was the
latest hearing in the Stronach family trust dispute—a case that’s
tearing apart one of Canada’s wealthiest families and galvanizing the
best legal minds on Bay Street.
One of the first to arrive was
Kent Thomson, the ferociously adversarial corporate litigator from
Davies representing Frank Stronach, the 86-year-old patriarch. Acting
for Frank’s daughter, Belinda, was Michael Barrack, a veteran partner at
Blakes whose LinkedIn profile describes his courtroom style as “street
fighter meets master chess player.” Also present were counsel for
various other Stronachs who’ve entered the fray, including Frank’s son,
Andrew, and all three Stronach grandchildren, Frank Jr., Nicole and
Selena. Among those lawyers were Alan Mark, a partner at Goodmans;
Matthew Gottlieb, managing partner at Lax O’Sullivan; and Linda
Plumpton, a senior commercial litigator from Torys. Mark Gelowitz, a
respected litigator at Osler, was there on behalf of Frank’s one-time
protégé, Alon Ossip. Tom Curry, the legendary litigator and a managing
partner at Lenczner Slaght representing Frank’s wife, Elfriede, turned
up late and had to hover by the door. One lawyer who was present later
said it felt less like a scheduling hearing than a reception for the
American College of Trial Lawyers. “We were all looking at the door,
like, ‘Seriously? Anyone else?’ ” By the time the judge was ready to
begin, it was standing room only, with 22 lawyers crammed in.
The
family is battling for control of the Stronach Group, a complex
collection of trusts, corporations and other entities Frank set up after
he left Magna International, the multi-billion-dollar auto parts empire
he founded in 1957. Last October, after a fruitless mediation, Frank
filed an excoriating 73-page statement of claim against Belinda and
Ossip, the Stronach Group’s CEO and formerly Frank’s close friend.
Frank, who declined interview requests for this story through his
lawyer, demanded more than $500 million, alleging his daughter and
protégé defrauded him to gain control of the family fortune, which they
deny. The document burns with explosive patriarchal rage, concluding
with Frank’s demand that Belinda and Ossip be removed as trustees of the
family trust.
The Stronach family compound in Aurora includes the company HQ, a
massive golf course, an artificial lake and three mansions: one for
Frank and his wife, Elfriede, one for Belinda and her kids, and one for
Andrew and his family
Even Frank’s friends told me they were
startled by the vitriol of the claim, which is an unmitigated attempt to
destroy his daughter’s reputation. “I bet he thought he’d just fire off
an angry shot, scare the hell out of everyone and then the whole thing
would be over in a couple of weeks,” says a source close to the family.
Instead,
Frank unleashed decades’ worth of repressed family acrimony: Belinda
filed her own claim against her father, while her brother and niece sued
her. The members of one of Canada’s wealthiest dynasties are now openly
accusing each other of reckless spending, incompetent leadership and
outright fraud. Their dysfunctional machinations have been laid bare in a
web of litigation so complex it could keep them bound up in court for
years to come. Frank and Belinda’s mutual intransigence isn’t surprising
to anyone who knows them well. They’re people who cleave to the hard,
glittering surface of life—street scrappers with the ability to bankroll
armies. But unlike most wars, theirs isn’t just about power or money.
It’s also about love.
Frank
Stronach emigrated from Austria to Canada in 1954, when he was 21.
Three years later, he set up a tool and die shop in a garage near Dupont
and Dufferin. The business expanded rapidly, growing with Canada’s
burgeoning manufacturing sector, and in 1969 the company merged with
Magna Electronics, a publicly traded industrial parts manufacturer.
Frank bought Beechwood Farm in Aurora and married a young Austrian woman
named Elfriede. Their daughter, Belinda, was born in 1966. A son,
Andrew, followed two years later.
In an interview, Belinda
Stronach described her childhood as normal. “My parents were traditional
and European in their approach to family,” she said. “My dad worked and
my mom stayed at home.” Frank’s all-consuming toil paid off. By the
mid-’70s, Magna International was a global leader in auto parts
manufacturing. His leadership style could be draconian: he was
autocratic and irascible, a man who operated on gut instinct and refused
to apologize for it. His biographer, Wayne Lilley, described Stronach
as “a genius and a buffoon wrapped together.” And yet his unorthodox
style generated great personal wealth. As they say in business, you
can’t argue with results.
Elfriede and Frank with the Queen at the Queen’s Plate in Toronto in 1997. Frank’s horse Awesome Again won the race. Photograph by Getty Images
Frank
realized early on that Andrew, his only son, was never going to take up
the mantle of power. Andrew inherited his father’s obsessive nature and
meticulous attention to detail, but not his charisma or garrulousness.
Frank did his best to ignore his son’s difference, allowing him to
pursue his own interests. As a boy, Andrew discovered a passion for
agriculture, which became the central focus of his life. In 1997, he
married Kathleen Flannery, a waitress and graphic design student, and
they had a daughter, Selena, in 2000. They later split—but never
divorced—and Andrew moved to Prince Edward County, where he bought vast
swaths of land to raise cattle. He’s now one of the county’s biggest
private landowners.
Belinda took a different path. She grew into
the quintessential golden girl: athletic, popular and vivacious, with a
robust work ethic. She welcomed the spotlight that came with her family
name, and from a young age regularly appeared at public events with her
father. Frank adored his daughter. He praised her constantly, publicly
extolling her beauty and brilliance, and on her 16th birthday, he gave
her a silver Camaro Z-28, a special-edition Indy pace car. Despite the
family’s wealth, Frank sent his children to Newmarket High, the local
public secondary school, ostensibly to keep them grounded. Belinda went
on to study business at York University but dropped out after a year to
work for her father. Two years later, when she was just 22, Frank
appointed her to the board of directors. While formal education wasn’t
important to Frank—he left school at 14—hard work and obedience were
everything. He didn’t just encourage the young Belinda to pursue her
dreams. He told her what to dream, then made it come true.
Belinda
entered the family business during a time of epic change. The company
nearly went bankrupt after the stock market crash of 1987, and she
watched as Frank ushered Magna through this rocky period. He implemented
a “no debt” policy, which would later help the company emerge
relatively unscathed from the 2008 financial crisis. Belinda rose
through the ranks quickly—too quickly in the eyes of some
associates—from vice-president to executive vice-president. In the late
’80s, she struck up a romance with Don Walker, then Magna’s VP of
operations and later its president and CEO. The union delighted Frank
and produced two children, Frank Jr. and Nicole, but it didn’t last. The
couple separated in 1995.
In the 1990s, Magna became more
profitable than ever. In 1992 it went public on the New York Stock
Exchange, and by the turn of the millennium, Forbes had named it
the world’s top auto parts company, with annual sales of $9.3 billion
(U.S.). Publicly, Frank was the emblem of Canadian entrepreneurialism—a
by-the-bootstraps immigrant with a penchant for big dreams and tough
talk. Behind the scenes, he was a cantankerous, controlling patriarch.
As one associate put it, “If you went out to dinner with Frank, he would
tell you where to sit and what to eat. And he meant it.” He disliked
criticism and was prone to flights of fancy. He would hire and fire on a
whim, often turning on people he perceived to be insubordinate.
Frank and businessman Robert McNair after their horse Touch Gold won the 1997 Belmont Stakes. Photograph by Getty Images
Emboldened
by his success, Frank embarked on a slew of outlandish passion
projects, including a theme park outside Vienna called World of Wonder
and a transatlantic luxury airline called Magna Air. Neither came to
fruition. At the end of the century, Frank formed Magna Entertainment
Corp. to buy and develop racetracks. The company became the largest
owner and operator of thoroughbred tracks in North America. But some
Magna shareholders disliked Frank’s tendency to commit company money to
what they saw as hare-brained schemes. They were furious when Magna
bought the Santa Anita racetrack in 1998 for $126 million (U.S.)—they
had invested in a successful auto parts company, not a pony player. To
quell their concerns, Frank signed an agreement the following year
restricting Magna’s ability to branch out into non-automotive agreements
until 2006.
The cornerstone of Frank’s empire was his sprawling
Aurora compound, which he built in the ’90s as the company’s Canadian
headquarters. Housed in a vast building with European-style pitched
roofs, the Magna headquarters was designed to resemble an Austrian
château. He also built Magna Golf Club, a 7,300-yard course, as well as a
courtyard and an artificial lake. He designed three residences: one for
himself and Elfriede, one for Andrew and Kathleen, and one for Belinda
and her kids. The houses were opulent mansions in the faux-Regency
style, complete with swimming pools and garage space for multiple luxury
cars.
Frank
started thinking seriously about succession in the early 2000s. By that
point, he’d established the Stronach family trust, naming his family as
beneficiaries and ensuring that his empire would remain within the
family and out of creditors’ hands. He arranged matters so the trust
owned his Magna voting shares, through which he controlled the company.
He also appointed himself super-trustee, endowed with the power to
appoint and remove all other trustees. And in 2001, he named Belinda CEO
of Magna, cementing her as his heir apparent.
Belinda with Bill Clinton at a Magna Golf Club charity game in Aurora in 2001. Photograph by Peter Redman/National Post
Three
years later, she stunned Bay Street by quitting Magna to pursue a
political career. She won a seat as a Conservative MP—Stephen Harper
spoke admiringly of the “glamour” she brought to the dull arena of
Canadian politics—but in 2005, she famously crossed the floor into Paul
Martin’s Liberal cabinet. After Harper beat the Liberals in 2006, she
surprised no one by announcing she would leave politics to resume her
role at Magna, which, unlike the Liberal party, was booming.
While
his daughter was in office, Frank met a young tax lawyer named Alon
Ossip. The two men could hardly have been more different. Where Frank
was loud, controlling and impulsive, Ossip was a soft-spoken workaholic,
obsessed with the intricacies of business and the law. He grew up in a
wealthy north Toronto family, graduated from Osgoode then practised tax
law at Goodman and Carr. There was something about Ossip that Frank
instantly liked. After just a few meetings, he offered him the role of
executive vice-president at Magna.
Belinda and Frank with singer Seal at the 2003 Breeders’ Cup at Santa Anita Park. Photograph by Getty Images
In
legal and business circles, Ossip is a polarizing character. He has a
reputation for arrogance and a tendency to think he’s the smartest guy
in the room. Others praise his obsessive drive and credit him with
generating much of the Stronach family fortune. If Shakespeare were
writing the Stronach family saga, Ossip would be the outsider who stands
in the shadows, whispering into the ears of the powerful lead players.
In the coming years, he became bound as tightly to Frank and Belinda by
money as they are by blood.
When Belinda returned to Magna, Frank
embarked on another round of kooky, money-losing side ventures,
including an electric bike company and an Austrian-themed energy drink
that was shut down after the test-market phase. (Its ad campaign
featured a lederhosen-clad model with the slogan “Keeps you yodelling
all night long!”) There were charitable ventures, too: he built a
housing project in Louisiana for 300 survivors of Hurricane Katrina,
called Magnaville.
Frank spent millions trying to make Adena Farms, his Florida livestock
operation, profitable. Belinda took over the farm last year. Photograph via Adena Farms/LinkedIn
He
also focused more on his agricultural pursuits. Frank bought his first
thoroughbred in 1962 and later purchased several major American
racetracks and a world-class horse-breeding operation near Versailles,
Kentucky. Beginning in 2010, Frank acquired 90,000 acres of land in
Ocala, Florida—which bills itself as America’s horse capital—and founded
Adena Farms, which he envisioned as an all-natural, grass-fed-cattle
farm. Employing a small army of agricultural workers, he converted the
land into pasture and built a small-scale meat-processing plant with the
capacity to slaughter 600 cattle per week. Over the next six years, the
Stronachs spent nearly $300 million to develop Frank’s livestock
business.
As his
fascination with animal husbandry expanded, so did the scope of his
dreams. He built a private members’ golf and country club where he
planned to develop 120 luxury residences. He opened two
restaurants—Frankey’s and Adena Grill and Wine Bar—and planned a chain
of retail shops that would carry Adena Farms beef. An hour and a half
down the road, he discovered a grove of mature oak trees, which inspired
him to start an organic hog operation to produce acorn-fed pork.
Because the hog farm was so far from the cattle operation, it would
require its own meat-processing facility, which would cost $60 million
(U.S.) to build.
Frank at the Fête Impériale at the Hofburg palace in Vienna in 2011. Photograph by Getty Images
Adena
lost money, and lots of it. While beloved by equestrians, Ocala isn’t a
particularly good place for raising grass-fed cattle—it simply doesn’t
have the necessary nutrient-rich grasses or soil. One former employee
told me the hog operation was particularly foolhardy: there was plenty
of land available near the cattle farm. “Frank had his ideas and he
wasn’t listening to reason,” said the employee, who was eventually
fired.
According to Belinda and Ossip, Frank enacted his ideas by
decree—there were no business plans, and he ignored independent market
research. “He had absolutely no compunction about spending loads of
cash, even when the business was draining money,” said one person close
to the farm. “And there was no follow-up and no one to manage him.” Some
Adena executives began to call the farm Frank’s Field of Dreams.
Frank commissioned a bronze statue of Pegasus fighting a dragon in
2012. The project, originally budgeted at $6 million, eventually cost
$55 million. Photograph by Ben Brant/Wikimedia Commons
The
most outrageous example of Frank’s spending came in 2012, when he
commissioned a gargantuan statue of Pegasus as a statement piece and
tourist attraction for Magna’s newly completed Florida racetrack,
Gulfstream Park. Frank did the initial sketches himself, of a giant
winged horse locked in battle to the death with a fire-breathing dragon.
In the end, two statues were built and cast in bronze. One sits in
Gulfstream Park today and the other—a perfect replica—is held in storage
in China. At 12 storeys high, the statue towers over the park. The
project, originally budgeted at $6 million, eventually ran to $55
million. In planning the statue, Frank also drew up plans for a “Pegasus
Park” on the Gulfstream site, which was to include a roller coaster, a
carousel, a lavish pony barn, a horse museum and a 5-D theatre inside
the statue. This never came to pass, because Belinda intervened. Many
people questioned Frank’s taste and business sense, but if that bothered
him, he didn’t show it. He’d made the family fortune. Why shouldn’t he
spend it how he liked?
In
May 2010, Frank made one of the most surprising moves in Canadian
business history. He relinquished his majority shareholder voting rights
at Magna, which he’d used to keep an iron grip on power for three
decades, in a deal valued at $983 million. The following year, Ossip
orchestrated a second deal worth an additional $700 million: the
Stronachs agreed to give up the rest of their voting rights in exchange
for Magna’s horse-racing and gaming assets. Once again, Frank made off
with a fortune. When the deal was done, the Stronachs formed the
Stronach Group to manage their accumulated wealth in trust, as well as
four main business divisions: racetracks and gaming; real estate
development; agriculture; and breeding, training and racing. The family
rewarded Ossip generously, signing over a five per cent interest in key
Stronach Group assets outside the family trust. And with her father’s
support, Belinda offered him the job of CEO of the newly formed Stronach
Group. She’d serve as chair.
Belinda with Pharrell Williams, Prince Royce, Lenny Kravitz and Post Malone at Gulfstream Park in 2018. Photograph by World Red Eye
With
Frank gone and Ossip as CEO, Belinda became the new face of the
Stronach family. Although she’d never been a horse lover, she used her
public profile to rebrand the long-declining sport of thoroughbred
racing. Since taking over, Belinda has persuaded a raft of celebrities
to attend her races, including the chef Bobby Flay, New England Patriots
coach Bill Belichick and musicians Ne-Yo and Post Malone. Earlier this
year, after 23 mysterious horse deaths on the Santa Anita track in just a
few months, Belinda garnered a wave of positive press for using the
crisis as an opportunity to modernize the sport. She proposed a long
list of safety and welfare changes to the California Horse Racing Board,
almost all of which were accepted. These included prohibiting jockeys
from using a whip except in safety-related situations, and adjusting
horse medication rules. Under Belinda’s leadership, the racing and
gaming group’s sales almost doubled in the past five years, with
revenues of $1.1 billion (U.S.) in 2017.
Rather than delighting
Frank, his daughter’s growing success seemed to spur resentment: Belinda
was overshadowing him. He became more obsessed with Adena Farms.
Increasingly exasperated with the growing expense of her father’s hobby
farm, Belinda dispatched Ossip to try to convince Frank to curtail
spending. Through those first post-Magna years, Ossip contends that his
role was increasingly one of damage control for Frank’s lavish and
unrealistic passion projects.
During this time of mounting
tension, Ossip adds, his relationships with both Belinda and her father
were warm and respectful. He was Frank’s best friend. At social
gatherings, Frank would introduce him as his “partner.” The two men
spent every New Year’s Eve together in Florida with Ossip’s family. But
as Ossip’s allegiance slowly shifted from the elder Stronach to the
younger, Frank’s carefully laid succession plan began to unravel.
Belinda and Frank at the Pegasus World Cup Invitational at Gulfstream Park in 2017. Photograph by Getty Images
In
2012, Frank founded an Austrian political party called Team Stronach.
He was always a staunch conservative, but by the time Team Stronach was
born, his political opinions had veered just slightly to the left of
Attila the Hun. Stronach later outlined his personal world view in a
2017 self-published book, The Question of All Questions: Where Are We Going and Where Did We Come From?,
which features the famed Pegasus-dragon statue on the cover. The book
is a rambling polemic about the nature of good and evil and the travesty
of over-regulation and taxation. He recommends, among other things,
offering cash payments of up to $500 for voluntary sterilization to curb
population growth, putting poor residents to work on government-run
urban farms so they can reconnect with the natural world, and separating
children from parents who suffer from addiction or mental illness so
they can be brought up in “government-supported child-care homes.”
Frank
financed Team Stronach with funds from the Stronach Group. In the end,
the party won 11 seats, including Frank’s own, making it the
fifth-largest party in the fragmented Austrian parliament. He relocated
to Austria to take up his seat on the backbench, but it wasn’t long
before the Austrian tax authorities showed up on his doorstep. As a
member of the legislature, Frank had to disclose his financial
information. In 2013, he resigned from all corporate positions at the
Stronach Group, including his role as super-trustee of the family trust.
He appointed Belinda in his stead, giving her ultimate power over all
decisions regarding the family coffers. Ossip, who was paid an annual
salary of $1 million in addition to his share of certain family assets,
was added as a trustee as well, as were Belinda’s kids, Frank Jr. and
Nicole. The balance of power had shifted heavily to Belinda’s side of
the family.
The same day
Belinda was appointed as super-trustee, something strange took place:
the Stronach Group’s in-house counsel created a set of undated documents
declaring Frank Jr. and Nicole’s resignation as trustees and Frank
Sr.’s reappointment. These documents, known as the “reappointment
instruments,” are the central issue of dispute in the Stronach family
drama. Frank claims he requested them with a view to resuming his
position as super-trustee if he ever wished to do so, and that all
parties understood that the documents would become effective when he
chose to reappoint himself.
Belinda and Ossip deny this was ever
the case. According to Belinda, such an intention would mean Frank’s
resignation was a sham designed to avoid Austrian public-disclosure
requirements. She maintains that the documents were created at Ossip’s
request because he was worried he’d be left with only Frank Jr. and
Nicole as co-trustees in the event of Belinda’s death or incapacity (she
has a history of breast cancer). Both Belinda and Ossip say that Frank
had no involvement in the documents’ creation.
Belinda with her children, Nicole and Frank Walker, at Gulfstream Park
in 2019. Photograph by Getty Images
Frank
lasted just a few months on the backbenches of Austrian politics. “I
rattled the cage. I said what had to be said. I’m so independent I don’t
have to suck up to anyone,” he said at the time. He returned home in
January 2014 and resumed work on Adena Farms, buying and selling
Stronach Group assets, and expanding the business, which was sucking up
vast amounts of money. He says he believed the reappointment documents
had taken effect—and accuses Belinda and Ossip of knowingly deluding him
into thinking he was still in power. Instead of telling him he no
longer had legal signing authority, Frank contends, they signed off on
contracts he executed after the fact to preserve his delusion. He argues
that Belinda and Ossip created a Truman Show–like world in which
he was the boss, when they knew he had no legal authority and could be
banished on a whim. Belinda and Ossip categorically deny participating
in any deception. They say Frank had largely stepped away from the
family business years earlier, and that he created his “delusion”
narrative in a flailing attempt to resume control.
In 2015, Frank
opened Adena Golf and Country Club in Marion County, Florida. The same
year, Belinda established a company of her own: Acasta Enterprises,
launched with Tony Melman, formerly of Onex Corp., and Geoff Beattie,
the former Thomson family advisor, and billed as Canada’s largest
special-purpose acquisition company. It’s a fund that allows public
investors to put their money in private equity transactions,
particularly in leveraged buyouts of underperforming companies. Though
increasingly at odds, father and daughter were finally in sync: Frank’s
golf club and Belinda’s company would both go on to bleed money.
Over
the next year, Belinda and Ossip regularly discussed Frank’s spending.
They say he had become increasingly unwilling to admit his passion
projects were not financially viable, even when presented with
incontrovertible proof. Ossip says that Frank’s projects had reduced the
family’s net worth by $800 million. He and Belinda agreed something
radical had to be done.
In December 2016, Ossip informed Frank
that the Stronach Group was facing significant liquidity issues and he
would need to rein in spending on Adena. Frank claims this was the first
he’d heard about it. When he protested, Ossip told him he’d have to
take the argument up with his daughter—she was the boss. During this
period, Frank says his daughter and Ossip were “confrontational,
disrespectful and insubordinate,” though they dispute this. In the
following weeks, Belinda pulled rank. She informed her father that his
attempts to reappoint himself were ineffective. He had no legal right to
act in the name of the business, and if he did, she would undermine
him.
Belinda with rapper 50 Cent at the Pimlico Race Course in Baltimore in 2016. Photography by Getty Images
Frank
responded by ordering Belinda to fire Ossip, whom he’d come to see as
the villain who’d played father and daughter against each other for his
own enrichment. Belinda was torn. On one side was her father, the man
who had given her everything. On the other was her CEO, who had become
as indispensable to her as he had once been to Frank. She attempted a
compromise. She suspended Ossip, asking him to go on leave until the
situation with Frank had cooled down. He agreed.
The family
managed to put their differences on hold and spend Christmas together
that year. In January, however, the feud resumed. Frank dated the
reappointment documents and sent them to Belinda, informing her he had
officially reappointed himself as a trustee. Belinda wrote back saying
she would not allow him to take control of the family business. She and
her father embarked on a mediation and later that year met to sign an
agreement saying the Stronach Group would fund anticipated capital and
operating expenditures for Adena Farms for the next three years up to a
maximum of $40 million (U.S.). Frank was appointed chairman of Adena
Farms and given signing authority over all farm expenditures under $1
million.
The truce didn’t last a month. According to Belinda,
Frank breached the terms of the ceasefire almost immediately by making
plans that exceeded the budget. Frank says he barely spent a cent.
Belinda cancelled all the leases for Adena’s proposed retail operation
and fired a number of employees without Frank’s knowledge. Then she took
over Adena. She shuttered the failing golf club and put the land up for
sale at a discount. She alleges that starting in the summer, her father
repeatedly cornered her kids, pressuring them to sign documents
reappointing him as trustee. She also claims he began doing everything
he could to undermine the Stronach Group—that he meddled with company
boards and went to the company’s bank, blocking her access to certain
funds for which he still had signing power.
Belinda with her son, Frank Jr., and Susan Sarandon at the 2016
Breeders’ Cup World Championships at the Santa Anita racetrack. Photograph by World Red Eye
Elfriede,
Andrew and Andrew’s daughter, Selena, sided with Frank, although their
feelings toward Belinda are said to be more hurt than angry. Andrew’s
team says she failed to pay attention to Stronach Group duties,
prioritizing her own financial interests. Belinda maintains she’s always
had the rest of the family’s interests at heart—that her fiduciary duty
to protect the family fortune was what sparked the row in the first
place.
Christmas 2017 came
and went for the family, this time without Frank. Instead, Belinda
spent it with her kids and her mother, who was devastated by the family
fallout. In August, Belinda presented a proposal to all family members
for the division of family assets. She suggested splitting assets based
on the current proportional equity interests in the family trust and the
businesses the family members were most involved in. Belinda and her
kids would get the racing and gaming businesses, and Andrew, Selena and
Elfriede would get the non-racing and non-gaming assets, including the
agriculture group. In addition, there would be a large cash payout from
Belinda to Andrew. The proposal went unanswered by all family members.
The
Stronachs remained at a standoff, their guns pointed but no one willing
to pull the trigger. And then Belinda sold the company jet—a luxury
enjoyed by the entire family but primarily used by Frank. Several people
suggested it was the jet sale, more than anything else, that prompted
Frank to sue. “You have to understand the mentality,” one employee said.
“Frank Stronach hadn’t flown commercial in well over 40 years.”
Alon Ossip, a tax lawyer, met Frank in 2006 and became his right-hand
man. Now Frank is accusing him of conspiring with Belinda to seize
control of the family empire. Photograph by Getty Images
As
the sale was being finalized, Frank filed suit against Ossip, Belinda
and her two children, seeking to regain control of the family empire. A
few weeks later, Andrew sued his sister, seeking to oust her and her
children as trustees and supporting Frank’s reinstatement. In the new
year, Belinda filed a lengthy statement of defence and counterclaim.
Kathleen Stronach filed for divorce from Andrew, in what friends say was
an effort to formalize their long-term separation and secure financial
support. And finally, in February, 18-year-old Selena filed suit against
her aunt Belinda. There are now four outstanding claims, and none of
the allegations have been proven in court. It’s a mess of epic
proportions with no resolution in sight.
These
days, the Stronachs’ Aurora family compound looks more like a luxury
ghost town. Belinda lives and works in a Yorkville condo. She recently
purchased an office building on Hazelton for more than $5 million and is
renovating it to be the Stronach Group’s new downtown headquarters.
Frank, who spent decades travelling back and forth from Austria, now
spends much of his time in Florida. Andrew has been in Prince Edward
County for decades and avoids Aurora as much as possible.
The only
people remaining at the compound are Kathleen and Selena, who have
strained relationships with the rest of the Stronachs. They live in
Residence 3, a 15,000-square-foot home that Kathleen helped design and
decorate 22 years ago. Selena owns a cattle farm called Daisy Springs.
According to her lawyers, she was “raised in an environment in which no
event, experience, consumer purchase or travel has been denied.” And yet
several sources close to the case assured me that Selena and her mother
are veritable outcasts, rarely invited to family events and uninvolved
with the family business.
Belinda’s children live a much more
conspicuous life. Frank Jr. and Nicole are still close to their
grandparents, despite the fact that they are suing each other for
millions. Nicole is a competitive equestrian, and Frank Jr. is an EDM
producer and DJ. Both are listed as official trustees and
vice-presidents of the Stronach Group and receive substantial annual
salaries despite having little to do with the running of the business.
Frank
Sr., for his part, appears to have a new succession plan in the works,
should he win back control of the Stronach Group in the courts. In late
April, he appeared on stage at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Arcadia,
California, just down the road from the Stronach Group’s Santa Anita
Park, and announced to a crowd of 200 that he would put the company’s
racing properties in a trust and allow “horsemen” to operate the
business. His daughter, not surprisingly, met his proposed act of
beneficence with deep skepticism. “My father recently proposed that we
give away our racing and gaming business. I am not sure what he will
think of next,” she recently told Toronto Life. “The fact that he
sued me and my children because he wants to raise beef cattle in
Florida ... is still unfathomable to me.” When asked if she believed her
father’s mental state was deteriorating, she responded with dry
diplomacy. “My father is in his late 80s and focused on his legacy,
including building a $55-million statue of winged Pegasus and a
fire-breathing dragon.”
Chris MacLeod, a lawyer at Cambridge LLP
who has known Frank since the late 1980s, argues that Frank’s business
judgment is sound. “Belinda and Alon supported Frank’s involvement in
that business for years, and only began to criticize his involvement in
the business well after it was established,” he says. “Their criticisms
concerning Frank’s so-called ‘passion projects’ are neither fair nor
accurate, and fail to recognize that Magna itself was one of Frank’s
first passion projects. So was the racing and gaming business of the
Stronach Group, which Belinda and Alon now characterize as its most
valuable and successful asset.”
The cynical old chestnut about
lawyers being the only winners has never applied so neatly as it does in
the ongoing battle of the Stronachs. By the date of the hearing last
April, millions had been spent. At last count, there were well over 50
corporate lawyers working on the case, including associates and
underlings. Factor in the Stronach Group’s in-house counsel, private
lawyers, PR representatives, reputation-management firms, mediators,
consultants and other professionals, and you have the population of a
small town. Helping the Stronachs diminish and destroy each other is big
business these days on Bay Street.
It’s difficult to grasp why
anyone would waste a fortune trying to ruin the person they love the
most, yet that’s exactly what Frank and Belinda Stronach are doing.
Their entire family is now locked in an act of mutually assured
destruction. Then again, many family businesses have combusted at the
point of friction where love and power intersect. The Bronfmans lost
millions to a family succession battle. So did the Irvings and the
Aspers, and the list goes on. The Stronachs’ flame-out is especially
spectacular.
As the feud
drags on, friends and associates of the Stronachs have been pleading for
peace negotiations to resume between Frank and Belinda. According to a
source close to the case, the idea of family therapy has been floated
repeatedly to all parties involved. For the first time in years, father
and daughter seem to be in agreement. It’s never going to happen.
This story originally appeared in the July 2019 issue of Toronto Life magazine. To subscribe, for just $29.95 a year, click here.
Here is a Tale of Horse Racing and 3 Lawsuits before the Yankee Mid Term
Elections that your fellow lawyers such as Franky Boy McKenna and many
other Maritimers may enjoy N'esy Pas Petey Baby MacKay?
Here is a Tale of Horse Racing and 3 Lawsuits before the Yankee Mid Term
Election that Franky Boy McKenna and many other Maritimers may enjoy
N'esy Pas Petey Baby MacKay?
Frank Stronach sues daughter Belinda for allegedly mismanaging family fortune
Lawsuit in Ontario Superior Court seeks more than $500M in damages
The Canadian Press · Posted: Oct 10, 2018 11:16 PM ET
---------- Original message ----------
From: "Barry, Clare"
<Clare.Barry@justice.gc.ca>
Date:
Sun, 14 Oct 2018 18:12:15 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Here is a Tale of
Horse Racing and 3 Lawsuits
before the Yankee Mid Term Elections that your
fellow lawyer
Franky Boy McKenna and many other Maritmers may enjoy
Je
serai absente du bureau le 15 octobre, 2018. Dans mon absence,
veuillez
contactez Ginette Mazerolle ou Sam Boorman dans notre bureau
regional.
I
will be away from the office on October 15, 2018 inclusive. In my
absence,
kindly contact Ginette Mazerolle or Sam Boorman of the
Atlantic Regional
Office.
---------- Original message ----------
From:
Forsætisráðuneytið <for@for.is>
Date: Sun, 14
Oct 2018 18:12:24 +0000
Subject: Forsætisráðuneytið hefur móttekið tölvupóst
þinn / Prime
Minister's Office hereby confirms the receipt of your
email.
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Forsætisráðuneytið
hefur móttekið tölvupóst þinn / Prime Minister's
Office hereby confirms the
receipt of your email.
Vinsamlega ekki svara þessum tölvupósti, hafið
samband í gegnum for@for.is / Do not reply to
this email. Contact us with any queries
via for@for.is
Responsable des installations scolaire
District
scolaire francophone nord-est
Téléphone : (506) 394-3407
Télécopieur :
(506) 394-3455 kevin.arseneau@gnb.ca
Ce
message est destiné à la personne désignée dans la présente et il
doit
demeurer confidentiel. Il ne
doit pas être réacheminé sans la permission de
l’expéditeur. Si ce
message vous a été envoyé par
erreur, veuillez aviser
l’expéditeur et effacer le message. Effacez
ensuite votre réponse. Merci de
votre
collaboration.
Veuillez ne pas imprimer ce courriel à moins
que ce soit nécessaire.
Sunday,
14 October 2018
Here is a Tale of Horse Racing and 3 Lawsuits before the
Yankee Mid
Term Elections that your fellow lawyer Franky Boy McKenna and
many
other Maritmers may enjoy N'esy Pas Petey Baby MacKay?
Sunday,
14 October 2018
Here is a Tale of Horse Racing and 3 Lawsuits before the
Yankee Mid
Term Elections that your fellow lawyer Franky Boy McKenna and
many
other Maritmers may enjoy N'esy Pas Petey Baby MacKay?
Trust that if Google blocks this email i will send it byway of another
email account and blog it for good measure then forward many people
the link to it
Message
blocked
Your
message to mcu@justice.gc.ca has been blocked. See technical
details below for more information.
http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2018/08/whys-does-cbc-care-what-petey-baby.html
Thursday, 9 August 2018
Why does CBC care what Petey Baby MacKay thinks about anything? https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "MacKay, Peter" <Peter.MacKay@bakermckenzie.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 14:39:17 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Minister Jean-Yves.Duclos Once again you
are welcome Now how about the RCMP, the LIEbranos and all the other
parliamentarians start acting with some semblance of Integrity after
all these years?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Thank you for your email. I am currently out of the office attending
meetings and have limited access to email and voicemail. If your
matter is urgent, or if you require assistance, please contact my
assistant, Nicole Bruni at nicole.bruni@bakermckenzie.com or at (416)
865-3861.
This message may contain confidential and privileged information. If
it has been sent to you in error, please reply to advise the sender of
the error and then immediately delete this message. Please visit www.bakermckenzie.com/disclaimers for other important information
concerning this message. Do tell does Petey Baby MacKay or
anyone else remember what went down between Don Amos his old girlfriend
Belinda's lawyer and I in early 2005? https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/frank-belinda-stronach-lawsuit-1.4858150
Frank Stronach sues daughter Belinda for allegedly mismanaging family fortune
Lawsuit in Ontario Superior Court seeks more than $500M in damages
The Canadian Press ·
Frank
Stronach, right, and his daughter Belinda Stronach are shown in 2010.
Stronach, an Ontario business magnate, is suing his daughter, two
grandchildren and others for allegedly mismanaging the family's assets
and trust funds. (Frank Gunn/Canadian Press)
An
Ontario business magnate is suing his daughter, two grandchildren and
others for allegedly mismanaging the family's assets and trust funds. Frank
Stronach, the man who started the auto-parts business Magna
International, and his wife Elfriede have launched the lawsuit in
Ontario Superior Court and say they have done so as a last resort. Stronach says in a statement that the couple has made "considerable efforts" over the last two years to resolve the matter. Thoroughbred
Daily News reports the couple have accused Belinda Stronach, the
chairman and president of The Stronach Group that runs horse racetracks
around the world, of conspiring by "unlawful actions" against the best
interests of other members of the Stronach family. The suit, which has not been proven in court, seeks more than $500 million in damages.
'His allegations are untrue'
Belinda Stronach has denied the allegations. "Family relationships within a business can be challenging," she said in a statement Wednesday night. "My
children and I love my father. However, his allegations are untrue and
we will be responding formally to the statement of claim in the normal
course of the court process." A spokesperson for The Stronach
Group CEO Alon Ossip, who is also named in the suit, called the
allegations "baseless and are not grounded in fact or reality." "Alon
has always honoured his obligations and acted in good faith to preserve
and grow the Stronach family's assets and to protect the interests of
all members of the family," Paul Deegan said in a statement. "This is a dispute between Stronach family members that should be resolved between family members."
Then there are the legions of Yankees who love to race and gamble over what happens in the races at the Stonach racetracks
I bet many Yankees recall the email found below with the Subject line
"Whereas Michael C Beck of Liberty Mutual and others want to know what I
know about Horse Racing perhaps you Yankees should ask your lawyers or
the Wannabe Governor Mike Gill or follow my Twitter account"
‘It Was A Fix From The Beginning’: Former Leading Owner Gill Ordered To Pay Record $274.5M In Defamation Suit
by Paulick Report Staff | 10.05.2017 | 11:28am Eclipse Award-winning owner Michael Gill,
who is no longer involved in the horse racing industry, has once again
made headlines after a New Hampshire jury awarded three Manchester,
N.H., businessmen a whopping $274.5 million in a defamation suit they
had filed against him. According to a report in the New Hampshire
Union Leader, the three men, AutoFair owner Andy Crews, Manchester
developer Dick Anagnost and Primary Bank founder William Greiner, filed
the lawsuit against Gill after he used electronic billboards, radio ads
and social media to accuse them of committing crimes, such as dealing drugs and money laundering. The plaintiffs' attorney, Steve Gordon, told
the Union Leader that he believes the $274.5 million verdict is the
largest personal injury verdict in the state's history. As to how much
of that amount the three men will actually receive from Gill remains to be seen. “The chances are my clients will see some of it. How much he has? I do not know,” Gordon said. “In 2015, he claimed he was the largest
mortgage broker in the country. The energy we put into trying the case,
we will double that energy into collection. And we put a lot of effort
into trying this case.” Gill is the founder of The Mortgage
Specialists, a large mortgage brokerage firm. Gill represented himself
at the week-long trial, but left before a jury was picked. He called the
proceeding a “criminal enterprise.” After the verdict was announced, Gill took
to social media, posting a statement on his ‘State of Corruption NH'
Facebook page in which he said, “I know that there is massive corruption
in all of our states. My purpose was to expose NH giving you the
absolute evidence of the depth of corruption and to use NH as a domino
to expose corruption in every state.” “I have exposed politicians, judges and law enforcement with absolute evidence and witnesses,” Gill went on. “I am not at that trial, it was a fix from the beginning.” Read more in the New Hampshire Union Leader Publisher – Ray Paulick Telephone – 859-312-2102
Now feel free to check my work
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dale Morgan <dale.morgan@rcmp-grc.gc.ca>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 10:48:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Attn Minister Ralph Goodale RE your two questions of me
today Well My Survey Says that you and your RCMP minions are
monumental Bullshitters N'esy Pas?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
I am AOD but on my cell if you need me. (506)435-4598. http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-rcmp-and-stephen-mcgrath-deputy.html
Saturday, 8 September 2018
The RCMP and Stephen McGrath the Deputy Minister of Justice of Nova
Scotia Should never forget their invitation to sue them N'esy Pas
Gilles Moreau?
---------- Original message ----------
From: Jody.Wilson-Raybould@parl.gc.ca
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2018 13:11:20 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: The RCMP and Stephen McGrath the Deputy Minister
of Justice of Nova Scotia should never forget their invitation to sue them
N'esy Pas Gilles Moreau"?
To: motomaniac333@gmail.com
Thank you for writing to the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould, Member
of Parliament for Vancouver Granville.
This message is to acknowledge that we are in receipt of your email.
Due to the significant increase in the volume of correspondence, there
may be a delay in processing your email. Rest assured that your
message will be carefully reviewed.
To help us address your concerns more quickly, please include within
the body of your email your full name, address, and postal code.
Please note that your message will be forwarded to the Department of
Justice if it concerns topics pertaining to the member's role as the
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada. For all future
correspondence addressed to the Minister of Justice, please write
directly to the Department of Justice at
mcu@justice.gc.camcu@justice.gc.ca
> or call 613-957-4222.
Thank you
-------------------
Merci d'?crire ? l'honorable Jody Wilson-Raybould, d?put?e de
Vancouver Granville.
Le pr?sent message vise ? vous informer que nous avons re?u votre
courriel. En raison d'une augmentation importante du volume de
correspondance, il pourrait y avoir un retard dans le traitement de
votre courriel. Sachez que votre message sera examin? attentivement.
Pour nous aider ? r?pondre ? vos pr?occupations plus rapidement,
veuillez inclure dans le corps de votre courriel votre nom complet,
votre adresse et votre code postal.
Veuillez prendre note que votre message sera transmis au minist?re de
la Justice s'il porte sur des sujets qui rel?vent du r?le de la
d?put?e en tant que ministre de la Justice et procureure g?n?rale du
Canada. Pour toute correspondance future adress?e ? la ministre de la
Justice, veuillez ?crire directement au minist?re de la Justice ? mcu@justice.gc.ca ou appelez au 613-957-4222.
Merci
Perhaps your lawyers will read my brief now?
Here is the first part https://www.scribd.com/document/354470191/36-1-June-23rd-2017-FCA-Brief
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Jensen, Jan"
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:04:38 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: Trust that I will sue the RCMP but methinks
one of Trump's many lawyers should be clever enough call the FBI dudes
in DC and Beantown ASAP EH?
To: David Amos
I will be away from the office and not returning until June 26, 2018.
If you require immediate assistance, please contact my assistant at
(902) 407 7461. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/rcmp-bullying-harassment-claims-lawsuit-1.4720126
RCMP faces $1.1B lawsuit over bullying, harassment claims dating back decades
Potential class action could represent thousands of officers, civilian
employees, students and volunteers
Rachel Houlihan, Dave Seglins · CBC News · Posted: Jun 25, 2018 4:00 AM ET
---------- Original message ----------
From: Ralph Goodale <info@email.liberal.ca>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 14:08:34 +0000
Subject: Two questions
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
Liberal Party of Canada
-----------------------------
Friend,
I've spent a lifetime listening to Canadians. I've considered it my
duty since 1974, when I was first elected as an MP.
I've always valued when Canadians have come to me with an idea or
issue, whether it affects them personally, or touches the entire
country. When people speak up, they can help ignite real, positive
change. So I listen closely.
In 2015, Canadians told us we needed to grow the middle class, and to
build an inclusive Canada where everybody has a real and fair chance
at success.
People spoke up about the high costs of raising a family. Now, more
than 300,000 Canadian children have been lifted out of poverty thanks
to the Canada Child Benefit - with 9 out of 10 families getting more
money to help with the costs of raising kids.
Canadians told us that they expect their government to get our natural
resources to market - and to do so while protecting the environment
and meeting our obligations to Indigenous peoples. We're getting that
hard work done.
This is the kind of progress we're making together - and I know
there's more work to do.
That's why I'm calling on you.
This week, my colleagues and I will be heading to our Summer Caucus
Retreat in Saskatchewan where we'll discuss our plans for this fall
and for the year ahead. I want to make sure that your input stays at
the heart of everything we do.
The Liberal team has launched our Forward to 2019 fall priorities
survey to give you the opportunity to share what matters to you.
Will you take this two-question survey to give important feedback to
the Liberal team about your priorities for the hope and hard work
ahead of us?
Take the Survey ➜ https://go.liberal.ca/page/s/forward-to-2019-fall-priorities-survey
I'm looking forward to hearing what you have to say.
Sincerely,
Ralph Goodale
M.P., Regina一Wascana.
-----------------------------
This email was sent to motomaniac333@gmail.com http://go.liberal.ca/page/unsubscribe?email=motomaniac333@gmail.com
350 Albert Street, Suite 920 Ottawa, Ontario, K1P 6M8, CA. Authorized
by the Federal Liberal Agency of Canada, registered agent for the
Liberal Party of Canada. https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2018/09/attn-david-duncan-young-i-just-met-your.html
Wednesday, 5 September 2018
ATTN David Duncan Young I just met your nasty little buddy Chris
Spencer of SNB tonight
Thanks to the Green Meanies from Fat Fred City anyone can view the
circus last night in Fundy
N'esy Pas Premier Gallant? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8HNzaABZww&t=203s http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.ca/2017/11/federal-court-of-appeal-finally-makes.html
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 https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fca-caf/decisions/en/item/236679/index.do
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Amos v. Canada
Court (s) Database
Federal Court of Appeal Decisions
Date
2017-10-30
Neutral citation
2017 FCA 213
File numbers
A-48-16
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)
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
For The Respondent / APPELLANT ON CROSS-APPEAL
---------- 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.
>
> Does Ricky Baby Doucet or anyone else recall this email???
>
> ---------- Original message ----------
> From: "Doucet, Rick (LEG)" <Rick.Doucet@gnb.ca>
> Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2014 01:07:58 +0000
> Subject: RE: Final Docs
> To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>
>
> Will get right on this.
> Always look forward to your brilliant thoughts.
> R
>
>
> Hon.Rick Doucet
> Legislative member for Charlotte-the isles
> 28 Mt.Pleasant Rd.
> St.George, N.B. E5C 3K4
>
> Phone / Téléphone : 506-755-4200
> Fax / Télécopieur : 506-755-4207
> E-mail / Courriel : rick.doucet@gnb.ca
>
> This message is intended for the person to whom it is addressed and is
> to be treated as confidential or private communications. It must not
> be forwarded unless permission has been received from the originator.
> If you have received this message inadvertently, please notify the
> sender and delete the message. Then delete your response. Thank you
> for your cooperation.
> ------------------------------
Barb
Hammond Roy, left, and Preston Harper, right, might be planning to vote
differently in the upcoming election, but they have something in
common: they will both be thinking more about the federal leaders than
their local candidates. (Chad Ingraham/CBC)
Does the name on the ballot really matter?
Alex
Marland, a political scientist at Acadia University, says research
shows that the majority of Canadians will be thinking on a national
level in a federal election campaign. (Acadia University)
Some voters might be extra cognizant of the local names on the ballot, while others might be thinking of the bigger picture. (Evan Mitsui/CBC)
Jenica Atwin, MP for Fredericton, was first elected as a Green but joined the Liberals two years later. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)
Elizabeth May hopes to spark Green Party rebound in Fredericton
Green MLA Megan Mitton told party supporters that Greens can win in New Brunswick, but it takes work. (Silas Brown/CBC)
Mark Dunphy said he supports the Greens because he's worried about pipeline safety. (Silas Brown/CBC)
On
the Green Party website, half the New Brunswick candidates have no
photos or biographies, and the party will not make them available for
interviews. (Green Party of Canada)
Cast
members of the HBO series Succession pose together at the 75th
Primetime Emmy Awards in Los Angeles in January. According to at least
one longtime observer, the conflict in the Stronach family bears a
resemblance to the infighting involving the TV show's Roy clan. (Aude Guerrucci/Reuters)
Selena
Stronach's lawyer, Matthew Gottlieb, addresses Justice Peter Osborne in
the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Toronto on Thursday. (Alexandra Newbould/CBC)
According
to a report, top thoroughbred owner Michael Gill is livid. The
Pennsylvania Horse Racing Commission has lifted its ban on the
controversial owner, but the move has come after he has sold his horses
and stepped
