November 27,2009 This is Exhibit "S" referred henceforth in all Mr. E. J.

Krass' legal documents pertaining to The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process going forward from this date. There is no need for attesting to its validity because Mr. E. J. Krass is the only honest person and individual in these matters which is proven by the other Exhibits especially Exhibit "K" on file no. 81581 with the superior court (british columbia - kelowna) and submitted to the Supreme Court ofCanada on September 15, 2009.
Besides, centripetal mechanics is supposed to be a known fact that is part of natural order and able to be used to affain Fundamental Justice where necessary.

T.
ircular force containment within the modified pulley system* of ALL ginglymus joints
C

J/

Tangental centrifugal force = r.elocily away from circle's circumfereflce when the string fails or DYSKINESI S romee in to eristencc whcn

&e load bering ligamenfs

are madc

INSUFFfOENT

to curlein these forcee

IN AtI,GTNGLYMUS'OI

a.ffidavit

of

sworn belore ne at

:c\SlS--.tJ-r\-srs^

r,t lhe Province oi Enlish Columbia,

this

2ar4rql&<L-20!g
A
Conmissioner .fbr takmg A.ffidavits u,ithtn the Province oi 3r ttuh Columbia

November 2'7,2009

is

Due lo pertaining ipertaining to The Petition to the Court Dtre Legal Process going forward frorl1r:::::::::i:i::ii.,.,::ii.' this date. There is no need for attesting to its validity because Mr. E. J. Krass :,iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii:i:: by is the onlv honest person and individual in these matters which is proven bV tffiriliri;i:ii::.:... Derson only other Exhibits especially Exhibit "K'f on fi1e no. 81581 with the superior couutii:'ii'i'iir: :iiiiiiiiiiiiiliiii:i:'. (british columbia - kelowna) and submitted to the Supreme Coufi of Canada on September 15,2409

Exhibit "T" referred henceforlh in all Mr. E. J. Krass' legal documents

i\{ICE DATE!
Bcsides, centripetal mechanics is supposed to be a known l'act that is part of nalural order and able to be used to aftain Fundsmenlal Juslice where necessary.

TRULY HA,AT,TTTY ARM

E 5 {' c'*s'. afiulavit ,svorn hefore nle al \-llB\r( EJc,*i*

p7
:n lhe Provinu
(,1

t hi.; i.s

l:,.rhhit

T "1"

referred ru ut thc

r,

Liflttsh Cohunhiu,

ithtn the Prtttncc al lir,itth Colunrhiu

Fronr this image, it is clear that there is no "hinge"' atrd, therefore, centripetal force is used in gnglymus joints

PLUS the pronator teres is mislabeled and CANNOT be contracting through hand pronation2---\

Q9

November 27,2009

"U" referred henceforth in all Mr. E. J. Krass' legal documents pertaining to The Pelition to the Courl Due Legal Process going forward from this date. There is no need for attesting to its validity because Mr. E. J. Krass is the only honest person and individual in these mafters which is proven by the other Exhibits especially Exhibit "K" on file no. 81581
with the superior court (british columbia - kelowna) and submitted to the Supreme Court of
Canada on September 15,2009. Place the fulcrum in this image at the front of the ulno-humeraljoint and you will notice that there never will be a gap at the back of the ulno-humeral joint nor any other healthy ginglymus joints as centripetal mechanics are what is employed in all such joints.

This is Exhibit

44

l,ir,[) referred to in the a.ffidavit o/ F -f, . V c'-s )

I'his ist
,sv,orn hefore nre

a/

r-s-S)a-AA-::i*-

20s
A
wirhin the Prcvinie

Conmissioner for takine

nl Britih

Ee

n ls ia ;g: t Ea i

EtgEg

Ei *'

iBEli$'i

ii EE:fa t*
EEE E= i

E sEgE

F s;E

iI

E .c EEg EiIE E FsE; EE =Eex s Exs S *rt ; E Es:

gfE

,(
dg- 2a &= E --.= 2,e =-

1.

, t.r.u

-,

l/ s-4r

- r

rr -+v y\f

.3

bF 'E=ca ;;< .go

or

E: B.l=
o -ZE.

-lG

'3

=
.5

rE

i ;aEi i;go5 e | . Eo g-a ;-a

Z,= z
et-J {2I.9 c-v--

g o

{ b

r \
.

i,

t q
a
:!

q)

d E-O.-

i i
k

! E
f

E:EE E;dFe

EE;; !:?.

i fi;E i'; 'E ig I ii;: ili ;gii? ;i *;E ii: :iFl{ . .ld+ >= E:
:.
2 2

slli i:lj

EEE;. E-x=;EiEi;iE E
-=-F! ;;-

=r F: E;

Egr {i E ;;
i

+ *sr

Fr

ir== ; il;i; =E =!i.Ei r :! ri E_=i;E=4i ?=o- i i=e:'ijE=,r1iE iiiEEtEsEiiiE,=== *ile;Egg;==-E; :E"y ;.-c * c.='-

EE::-; ai =p;

H!:i E:- =l,+iiEz .:ide

;i iii

;E

:
=
E
g e

lji

?JEETZEI-;1CEE
uG L= d c id du *

r:

F e

E
t-

tb'ttlf:*t .trc1 'vlgft rdt'AvtrcriN{dr S,l$Xr2r \.tr*d

a

-'rarr)

lt: 6{

.T FE

.sEE
;iE.
* o
h
a^

:rEi =3 gfe
E

9= Dg G.-

.tg

tr (1)

t !

*3

o o o
(B

-e=

\ { EE Q
E

ii!
si; e
EE:i s
=

Ej r

E9 &c .-o oE

qE

: 5 ! ,

E E,;: i-=,= {
=:iE! E&i
1'L=E 9 o.:5 6 -6o
El

g E ;i jfi=*

I Q

v
tri
L;

o a

:'r eE
!.
rn'E

o
l, E

cd

EE
G'

tO A=

o o !
o)

C) C)

t \:

l) 6 a

rE

:E

;;;

ar= ri
.be
l\o3 a^ c; lfo a=

ii:; !i
z=_=E

EEi
E :*:

rt:,.E.

'.E' E ftu:E EEE d:ii; i:i

i E:;

e c)
L

rr

l!o rl=
,a

t: ac

E o

\! 130-

kl
a a

- b'

.!-_9 +=

E F

" !!t'

rhis is

r,r,bl

a.ffidavitol

6 5 {ce.ss
a! tslB)\

*frred

ro in the

.sworn hefore ne

K\ssr<re'

Comnissioner

within the Province o!'Brilish Colunbia

for takng

AIJ'idavits

Evidence, centripetal mechanics in ginglymus joints was medically disclosed pubtically but is being held back as is the modifted palley systent:u!

ilr 014

Biomechanical study of ligernents around the elbow joint

Regan-WD; Korinek-Sl; Morrey-BF; An

The ligamentous contribution to elbow joint stability is a product

of

morphologr and biologic parameters of ach of the collaterd, (uEq[glerm) ligaments. Better understanding of " these characteristlcs" is of paramount importance for successful ligament r@onstnrction in the

second, the stnrctural propenies of each collateral ligament were

determined by using bone-ligament-bone preparations. The anterlor medial colhterel and radlal collateral ligament (RCL) were taut I througtout collateral mmt of the entire arc of Oerlon. The posteritr ligamart (PMCL) was taut only when dre elbow was in a flexed position

in strength (357 N).

(htrp://wheelessonline.com/ortho/biomechanical_study_of_ligaments_around-the_elbowjoint)

Unforfunately, the medical community has chosen to cure the ailments brought to its mernbers many of the and forgotten that its definition of human EurDEpceul f centripetal physics and engineering especially So, this major discovery that clearly shows that, in health bodies, the primary joint of flexion/extension is the contrary to the medical theories went improperly exposed to the general (actually 40 +)years now. The time is now to bring forth the changes! public for

rtr

Sincerely,

Mr. E.J. Krass

Founder of the Unified College of Medicine

llg

Bionrechanicalsnrdyof ligamentsarudtbelbowjoint-Wheless'Textbookof

Orthop... Page I of I

Duke Orthopaedics
!,?g'nlS

[h_eel91s' Textbook of Orthopaedics

grsrnd;ra

z tr.Ert$t brwb.d t-

H'(ro COnt*1(.b Myracoml

Blomechanlcal study of llgaments around the elborv lolnt

FlCo guoe^tcE
qt u Cd( r! nn'!4
h
0ra

-orr4

0b

t|trcrrd ptoprill of

-GoD

lg,nrn rurlucdoG mr rfnb h ttuEn (Sf $.

he://www.whcel*smline.com/or6o/biorrechanical-study-of-ligaments-a*d-the-e1...

f.rr'*6

Biomechanics of the distal radioulnar joinr - Wheeless'Textbookof

Orttr...

hftp://www.wtrcclessooline.conr/ortlrc/biomechanics-of-thc-distal-radio"'

Duke Orthopaedics
Wheeless' Textbook of Orttropaedics
$;!e lnric( A '

Searcx Srie

bt WoI(l

Hc0E Coiiaa Us i3-

AciD(ol

Blomechanics of the dlstal radioulnar foint

t

krrdrsl+Rt Dcpcnnert ot ottoaedcr. uil ffic, llryo lrodcal Scttod' b e cdnderkhlirwhnd h loru.drsn dldt*tGtpdmdon 8rtd rcMy
in

P a&56. Tho

dCd

r*(*tt

loIil

eurfa,

fte rame sduc'pg.

iltru.gifETFC. lhcT

fryaarm. Ulnar variarrce b a

lbct

ula

of il8 sfOnmsn Yvlh

hg totetbnal axis d lhe

h tho darlqn.|lt d lct eral clnlcd aondluont. Autrlof'&!U*1,

tr,.e

voc.\n^5

oT +t'^ 3!

"# alb-"t

llg 0151
I of
2

Saskatchewan
Uinistry of
Justlce and Attorney General
Constitutional Law

820 -1874 Scarth $rcet

Regina, Canada

s4P4B3

This ls afridavit of

referred to in the

E. J. IGass email: unaprcSd@telus.net

tor B;ltish Columbie

Dear Sir:

Re:

Notice of Constitutional Question

(Petition to the Court, proPerlY)

Further to the Notice of Constitutional Question which has been served upon the Attomey General for Saskatchewan, please be advised that we will not participate in the hearing of this application.

Youn truly,

/;,.*
Graeme G. Mitchell, Q.C.

*'J"c'*az
i\O LO CONTBNDO!

Director
GGIWsrh

AcitiB

Prpt

Mr.

E.

f. Krass,

SoH

Just Call Me - Galileo ll/Founder of the Unified College of Medicine Spokesperson for THE TRWH BASED FREE SOCIETY

NO LO CONTENDO!
This only exists in jurisprudence and is used to indicate that the matter is unopposable even though the evidence made that point clear and, therefore, its existence exposes the need for The Petition to the Court
Due Legal Process.

NO ENTITY has the right to be wrong and to maintain and defend the system's wrongness in the situation/clicamstancesi i.e. have the INALIENABLE RIGHT to be wrong in perpetuity - BAD

FAITH.
Doing Right is entrenched in everyone having the right notto be deprived of the right to life,liberty and secirity of person EXCEPT in accordance with The Principles o{Fundamental Justice.
The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process uses the same standard that applies to us, the people, where

anything said or written if not coerced can be used in court to establish the simple incorrectness of the govemments' laws, schemes and due process for correction of its lies, duplicity and deceit.
The

Exhibits

on file with the courts AFFIRM AND AFFIRMED to the recipients, served notice of the

ongoing proceedings, that the governments' agents at the insistence of the law (arm's length) KNOWINCLY lied in arriving at its decisions - BAD FAUH - that have disenfranchised and are dividing everyone because our "anecdotal" experience was too great a threat to the system as this personal experience is known but CANNOT be reconciled with the system - it only repudiates the current civilization!
of Rights and Freedoms used the proper wording for The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process as the disenfranchised from the laws and schemes of the govemments and establishment have the right to petition the court to obtain the appropriate and JUST REMEDY in the circumstances which the lies ofthe govemment- BAD FAITH - determine to mean completely changing
S. 24

(l) of The Charter

the administration of Canada to the point where the courts must accept all laws and orders presented by

the disenfranchised: i.e., with nobody having the right to life, liberty and security ofperson,due to none of the current laws having a Fundamental Justice Dictate which would then make the law and scheme

universal dnd uniform across Canada and which would, therefore, unifr everyone under Fundamental Justice,The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process will rectiry the current standard of the rule of laws, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, which has produced chaotic justice because the outcome is different from
place to place based upon the whims of the rulers on any given day and which can be reversed in any subsequent election and reversed again and again..

The disenfranchised in The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process are not going to court to obtain another opinion by a judge but are litigating (going to court) to get the appropriate and JUST REMEDY based simply upon the correctness of the decision/simpliciter/the patently obvious/self evident Truth or lack thereof until the court proclamation hearing.

in the circumstances

PO Box

l04l

STN MAIN, DAWSON CREEK BC VlG 4H9

Page

I ofl

EJ Krass

Attach:
Regards,

Frcm: Date: To:

"Heming,ShellyJU"<Shelly.Heming@gov.sk.ca> Thursday, February 18,2010 3:57 PM

<unaprcSd@telus.net> EJ KRASS Feb 18-10.pdf Please see attached letter.

Subiect:

tholly llemlng Gonrtltutlonal Law tlnlrtry of Justlcc and Aftorncy Gencral E2O.1A74 Scailh ttrcct Rcglne SK E4P 483 Ph.7E73E4 Fat7E7-9111 Enall: $hclly.Hcmlng@gov.sk.ca

3/15/2010

ilinbtry of ttte A0omcy Goneral

Crorm LawOffoe
Civil ln, Building 720 BayStrcet 8th Floor Toronto ON MsG 2Kl TeUT6t (416) 32e400E Fex/T6c.: (41 6) 32e41 81

tlnbOmdu
Procurcur g6n6ral BuFau doc avocatB d h Courcnne Dro[ civil
ItlcMuilry-Scofr Buitsing 720 rue Bay

lftlludryScd

8'6tage
Toonto ON MsG 2Kl Pbas
S.V.P. Se

lcfl'to Fllo r$rer au doesler

tlo.

February 26,2010 Delivered by email: unaprcSd@telus.net Attention: Mr. E.J. Krass

Dear Mr. Krass,

We are in receipt of your Petition to the Supreme Court of Canada, addressed to the Honourable Chris Bentley, Attorney Generalfor Ontario. You're email has been refened to this office for a response. This is a matter that appears to have been initiated in Kelowna British Golumbia. Since this matter does not involve the Province of Ontario, we will take no further action. Please be advised that there is nothing more we can do for you in this regard and our file is closed. Yours

a
Craig Slater Director

Mr.

E.

f. Krass,

SoH

Just Call Me - Galileo ll/Founder of the Unified College of Medicine Spokesperson for THE TRWH BASED FREE SOCIETY

REPUDIATED ARGUMENT

The filing of FORM 6 (RULE 13 (2) ) - ENDORSEMENT ON ORIGINATING PROCESS FOR SERWCE OATSIDE BRITISH COLUMBIA AND flre Principles of Fundamental Justice REPUDIATE the argument presented by Ontario.
According to Ontario's legal logic, Fundamental Justice, that is ubiquitous and universal, has been "replaced" with jurisdictional and individualjustice in defiance of Everyone's Legal Rights - s. 7 of The Charter of Righn and Freedoms and The Charter of Rights and Freedom,s. This means that a person caught breaking in to someone else's house in, say, Whitehorse or Prince Ceorge or London, Ontario or Vanpouver, etc. must receive differential court treatment just as every case that goes before the WCB or
social services receives differential treament where the similarity of circumstances has no relevancy atall onthe outcomes whichthen allows for illegitimate"judicial reviews"to questionthe facts and words on the paper along with the character ofthose having been wronged just so that the injustice continues plus these quasi-judicial decision are'final and bindingl' on EVERYONE including alljudges especially those at the lower court levels but not The Supreme Court of Canada. Oh, that's right. In british columbi4 now, ifyou are guilty of a minor crime in differing communities, you receive what is labelled as"community justice" not Fundamental Justice. So, one person can go to jail

for the exact same criminal act as another in another community but the second person, by virtue of the

locationoftheincident,getsawaywithnojailtimeandjustgetssomeformoftreatment. Thesediffering standards for justice arise solely from cost benefit analysis rather than The Principles of Fundamental Justice and their uniffing power by the application of The Process of Elimination where injustice in the
form of multiple standards for punishment determines that the laws and standards really are the problem. To understand why justice is different from place to place now in british columbi4 the argument is: to prosecute everyone and punish them with prison sentences in Vancouver is untenable given the amount of "crime". But, with so few similar crimes in say Hixon, Yahk, etc., the new community justice
standards don't apply to the same criminal acts out there and the people, beyond Vancouver or Kelown4

etc.,

will receive the manimum sentence according to the rule of law provincially or federally.

The Attorney Cenerals must now explain how their jurisdiction is superior or different from other jurisdictions determining thatThe Principles of Fundamental Justice,asstipulated ins. 7 ofThe Charter of Righ* and Freedoms, do not apply equally there when The Supreme Court of Canada has already
determined that BAD FAITH and"reverse onus" is not acceptable!

Also, how is it that the same circumstances for inj ured workers across Canada receive far differing levels of compensation and medical aid depending upon their location and also locations within the provinces? This fact is unacceptable as it breaches The Principles of Fundamental Justice and Everyone's Legal Rights which are universal and ubiquitous and that's why they are partof The Charter's Neutral Citationl

PO Box 1041 STN

MAIN, DAWSON CREEK BC

Vlc

4H9

Page

ofl

EJ Krass

<unaprcSd@telus.net> Ltrto E J Krass Feb 2610.pdf Sublect Conespondence frcm the Ministry of the Attorney General Attention: EJ Krass

Attach:

Frcm: Date: To:

"Hines,Rebecca(JUS)"<Rebecca.Hines@ontario.ca> Monday, March 01,20101:20 PM

Good aftemoon Mr. Krass,

ln response to your conespondence to the Honourable Chris Bentley, please find attached the letter of Craig Slater, Legal Director with Crorrn Lavv Office Civil. Yours truly,

Rebecca Hines

A/Is$c

Goordinabr

Grown law

Offie Ciyil, l{inisEy of the Attorney Genenl

3nst20t@

Page

I of1

EJ Krass

From: Date: To:

"Collins,Felif'<felixcollins@gov.nl.ca>

Thursday, February 18, 2010 4:49 AM "EJ Krass" <unaprc8d@telus.net> Attach: ATT00133.txt Subiec{: Read: lnitiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process Your message

To:

Collins, Felix Subject Initiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process Sent: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 0l:42:50 -0330

was read on Thu, 18 Feb 2010 08:19:53 -0330

"This email and any attached files are intended for the sole use of the primary and copied addressee(s) and may contain privileged and/or confidential information.Any distribution, use or copying by any means of this information is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please delete it immediately and notiry the sender."

3trst20t0

Page

I ofl

EJ Krass

From: Date: To:

"ChristineLPuccini"<PUCCINCL@gov.ns.ca> Monday, March 15,2010'12:'13PM

<unaprcSd@telus.net> Receipt of documentration

Subiect
El Krass

March 15,2010

Dear Mr. Krass: This is to acknowledge receipt of the documents emailed to Minister More on February L7, ?OLO, and faxed on March L2,20L0. These documents have been received by this office and sent to Minister More for her review.

Sincereli,

Christine Puccini Correspondence Coordinator Department of Labour and Workforce Development Phone: 424-6395 Fax: 424-0575 E-mail: puccincl@gov.ns.ca ( mailto:puccincl@gov.ns.ca )

3/1512010

Page

I of I

EJ Krass

From: Date: To:

Bonjour,

"CabinetduMinistre"<ministre@ustice.gouv.qc.ca> Wednesday, February 17,20'1010:07 PM

"EJ Krass" <unaprcSd@telus.net> R6p. : lnitiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process (Confirmation)

Subject:

Nous accusons r6ception de votre courriel et vous remercions d'avoir communiqu6 avec la ministre de la Justice. Nous vous assurons que votre demande sera trait6e avec toute I'attention qu'elle m6rite. Veuillez agr6er nos salutations distingu6es.
Le cabinet de la ministre de la Justice

!200, route de l'Eglise, 9e 6tage Ediflce Louis- Phili ppe-Pigeon Qu6bec (Qu6bec) G1V 4M1 T6l6phone: (41-8) il3-42L0 T6l6copieur: (418) U6-OO27 > > > unaprcSd L8/2/2010 0:06 > > >

Avis de confidentialit6: Ce message est confidentiel. Il est d l'usage exclusif du destinataire ci-dessus. Toute autre personne est par les pr6sentes avis6e qu'il lui est strictement interdit de le diffuser, de le distribuer ou de le reproduire. Si le destinataire ne peut 6tre joint ou vous est inconnu, nous vous prions d'en informer imm6diatement I'exp6diteur par courrier 6lectronique et de d6truire ce message et toute copie de celuici.

3lt5l20t0

Page

I ofl

EJ Krass

Frcm: Date: To:

"MailAdministrato/'<Postmaster@legpo.leg.gov.mb.ca> Wednesday, February 17,20'1010:16 PM

<unaprcSd@telus.net> lnitiating The Petition to the Coud Due Legal Process.eml MailSystem Enor- Retumed Mail

Attach:

Subfect:

This Message was undeliverable due to the following reason:

The following destination addresses were unknown (please check the addresses and re-mail the message): SMTP
<

minjust@leg.qov.mb.ca >

Please reply to if you feel this message to be in error.

3/rs/2010

Page

I of I

EJ Krass

Frcm: Date: To:

Attach:

Sublect

"FloydRoland"<Floyd_Roland@gov.nt.ca> Monday, February 22,20'1011:12 AM "undisclosed-recipients:" ATT00025.bd Not read: lnitiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process

Your message

To:
Cc:

Floyd Roland

Subject Initiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process Sent Wed, 17 Feb 2OL0 22:14:50 -0700
was deleted without being read on Thu, 18 Feb 2010 16:58:32 -0700

3lt5l20r0

Page

I ofl

EJ Krass

Frcm: Date: To:

Canada).

"Campbell.Mpq, Gordon"<Godon.Campbell.MtA@leg.bc.ca> Thursday, February 18, 2010 10:06 AM "EJ Krass" <unaprc8d@telus.net> Attach: ATT00070.tl!t Sublect Read: lnitiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process Your message was read on Thursday, February 18, 2010 9:05:44 AM (GMT-08:00) Pacific Time (US

&

3lt5l20t0

F-

Page

ofl

EJ Krass

Attach:

Frcm: Date: To:

Sublect:

"McGuinty_Dalton-MPP-CO" <dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org> ThuMay, February 18, 2010 1O:il AM "EJ Krass" <unaprcSd@telus.net> ATT00089.bd Read: Initiating The Petilion to the Court Due Legal Process

Your message

To:

McGuinty_Dalton-MPP-CO Subject Initiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process Sent Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:05:38 -0500

was read on Thu, 18 Feb 20L012:04:18 -0500

3lt5l20t0

Page

I of I

EJ Krass

From: Date: To:

"Premier," <premier@gov.nl.ca> Thursday, February 18, 2010 7:28 AM "EJ Krass" <unaprcSd@telus.net> Attach: ATT00108.bd Subjeck Read: lnitiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process Your message

To:

Premier, Subject: Initiating The Petition to the Court Due Legal Process Sent: Thu, l8 Feb 2010 0l:42:34 -0330

was read on Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:58:54 -0330

"This email and any attached files are intended for the sole use of the primary and copied addressee(s) and may contain privileged and/or confidential information. Any distribution, use or copying by any means of this information is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please delete it immediately and notiff the sender."

@
3lL5l20t0

F
Page

ofl

EJ Krass

From: Date: To:

"ChristineLPuccini"<PUCCINCL@9ov.ns.ca> Monday, March 15,201012:13 PM

<unaprc8d@telus.net> Receipt of documentration

Subiect:

March 15,2010

Krass

Dear Mr. Krass: This is to acknowledge receipt of the documents emailed to Minister More on February L7,20LO, and faxed on March L2, 20L0. These documents have been received by this office and sent to Minister More for her review.

Sincerel

Christine Puccini Correspondence Coordinator Department of Labour and Workforce Development Phone: 424-6395 Fax:, 424-0575 E-mail: puccincl@gov.ns.ca ( mailto:puccincl@gov.ns.ca )

3l15t20t0

Page

I of I

EJ Krass

Attach:

Frcm: Date: To:

"lgnatieff,Michael-M.P."<ignatM@parl.gc.ca>
Thursday, February 1E, 2010 6:40 AM "EJ Krass" <unaprc8d@telus.net>
ATT0O123.bd

Read: lnitiating The Petltion to the Court Due Legal Process Your message was read on February 18,2010 8:40:48 AM (GMT-05:00) Eastem Time (US & Canada).

Subiect

3lt5l20lo

Page

I of I

EJ Krass

From: Date: To:

<LaytoJ@parl.gc.ca> Wednesday, February 17,201010:01 PM

<unaprcSd@telus.net>

Subject:

Thank you for writing / Merci pour votre courriel

We would like to acknowledge receipt and thank you for your correspondence. Please be assured your comments and views are valued as all emails receive proper attention.lf required, we will be providing a specific reply to your concern.

If you would like information concerning the work of our team of New Democrat MPs and our latest policies, please visit our website at: http://www.ndp.ca.
Again, thank you for writing.

All the best,

Office of Jack Layton, MP (Toronto-Danforth) Leader, Canada's New Democrats

Nous avons bien regu votre correspondance et tenons A vous remercier. Sachez que nous tiendrons compte de vos commentaires, car tous les courriels reqoivent I'attention voulue. Nous r6pondons aussi directement d certaines pr6occupations, le cas 6ch6ant.

voulez plus de renseignements sur nos actions et le travail de notre 6quipe de d6put6s, veuillez consulter notre site Web:
Si vous

Nous vous remercions encore une fois de nous avoir 6crit.

Sincdres salutations,

Bureau de Jack Layton, d6put6 de Toronto-Danforth Chef du Nouveau Parti d6mocratique du Canada

3lt5l20t

,-_x Transmission Log - Outgoing Faxes

.Fhx#','
2t17t2010
10:20 PM 10:32 PM 10:51 PM 11:05 PM 10:18 AM 9:34 PM 10:02 PM 10:13 PM 10:14 PM 10:16 PM 10:25 PM 10:34 PM 10:45 PM 10:54 PM

Jean Charest
Don Morgan Eva Aariak Office of the Registrar Andrew Swan Rob Nicholson Alison Redford Bernard LeBlanc Doug W. Currie Doug W. Currie Ross Landry Marilyn More

2tfinuv
2t17/2.010

1418643-3924 1(306) 787-1232

1

7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 0 0 7 7 7 7 0 7

OK OK OK OK OK OK OK OK

(867) 97s-50s1

2117nUO 2t18/2010 3t12t2010

161 399691 38

1(2U)945-2517
1(613) 992-7910

ilnnu0
3t12t12010

1(780) 4224,621
(s06) 4s3-3651 1(902) 368-4699
1

3t12t2010 3t12t2010 3t12t2010 3t1U2010

1(902) 368-4699

Error Error
OK OK OK OK

1(902) 424-0510 1(902) 424-0575

1867 3934199

3t'tu2010
3t't2t2010 3t12t2010 3t12t2010

10:56 PM '11:06 PM

Marian Horne Jackson Lafferty Doug W. Currie Robert W. J. Ghiz

1(867) 873-0274
1(902) 3684699 1(902) 368.4416

Error
OK

3/12201011:14:58 PM

Page 1 of

'y"
Current (April 2010) Supreme Court Act (British Columbia)
Powers and privileges
The Chief Justice, Associate Chief Justice and judges have all the lx)wers, rights, incidents, privileges and immunities of a judge of a superior court of record, and all other powers, rights, incidents, privileges and immturities that on March 29,1870, were vested in the Chief Justice and the other justices of the Not necessary when judges and the judiciary are acknowledged to be FALLIBLE just like the laws

3 (l)

court.

(2) The court may be held before the Chief Justice or before any one of the judges.

Rule 5lA

Setting Down Applications for Hearing

[en. B.C. Reg.36712000, Sch. s.5.] Application of this rule

isEt,,r,'Y rcferred to in the This offidavitol V-C-sS, (&\trsntbeloo ne at ( r:.orn

F{

.t lhe Province o1 Bntish Columbia,

"lg\(

(l)

c>This rule applies to originating and interlocutory applications. (The objective evidence DICTATED the Definitions existence of originatinglPetitions to the Court Due Legal Process to go with BAD FAITfi (2) In this rule: Petition to the Court Due Legal Process means a person bringing an originating and OR interlocutory application; "applicant" jurisprudence - ALL THAT exists for due process today "court day" means a day on which the registry is open;
"respondent" means a person who has delivered a response in Form 124. -NONE FILED! [am. B.C. R:eg.20312001, s. (b).] Setting application for hearing

ttris

22

\ 20-6
-

(3) An applicant wishing to set an application down for hearing must file
(a) 2 copies of a notice of hearing in Form 126, (b) the original notice of motion, if not already filed, and (c) 2 copies of one of the following documents setting out or marked up in such a way as to indicate the relief that is to be sought at the hearing:

(i)

requisition;

(Summary Orders and the Proclamation document!)

as the case may be.

(iD the notice of motion orthe claim for relief in the petition,

[am. B.C. Re5.20112004, s.

l.]

When notice of hearing must be filed

(4) Except

as

provided for by subrule (12) (0, a notice of hearing must be filed,

(a) in the case of an application without notice or an application to be made by consent, at any time before the hearing of the application, and

(b) in any other case, at any time before noon on the day before the date set for the hearing of the application.
[am. B.C. Reg. 198/2003, s. 8 (a).] Date and time of hearing

(5) The hearing must be set for 9:45 a.m. on a date on which the court holds chambers or at such other time or date as has been fixed by the court or a registrar.
Date and time if hearing time more than 2 hours

(6) If the application is estimated to take more than 2 hours, the date and time of hearing must be
fixed by the registrar. Notice of hearing to be delivered to respondents

(7) The notice of hearing, whether filed or unfiled, must be delivered to each respondent in
accordance with subrule (8) unless the apptication is to be made without notice or is to be made by consent.

[am. B.C. Reg. 198/2003, s. 8 (b).]

Time for delivery of notice of hearing

(8) The applicant must deliver the notice of hearing to each respondent,
(a) if the applicant or any respondent has estimated that the time required for the hearing of the application will be more than 30 minutes, at least 7 clear days before the date set for the hearing, or

(b) in any other case, at least 2 clear days before the date set for the hearing. Documents to be filed with the notice of hearing if application is without notice

(9) If the application is to be made without notice, the applicant must file, with the notice

of hearing, the original of every affidavit, and of every other document, that
(a) has not already been filed in the proceeding, and

(b) is to be referred to at the hearing.

Documents to be filed with the notice of hearing if application is by consent, unopposed or estimated to take not more than 30 minutes

(10) If the application is to be made by consent, will be unopposed, or will be opposed but is not
estimated by the applicant or by any respondent to take more than 30 minutes, the applicant must file, with the notice of hearing and other documents referred to in subrule (3),
(a) the original of every affrdavit, and of every other document, that

(i) (ii)

is delivered by the applicant to a respondent with respect to the application, and

is to be referred to at the hearing, and

(b) a copy of every response, affrdavit and other document that

(i) (ii)

was delivered by a respondent to the applicant with respect to the application, and is to be referred to at the hearing.

Documents to be filed by respondent if application is opposed - NOT APPLICABLE!

If the application will be opposed, each respondent must, before the hearing commences, file the original of every affrdavit, and of every other document, that
(a) was delivered by that respondent to the applicant with respect to the application, and

(l

l)

(b) is to be referred to at the hearing by that respondent. Procedure if the application is estimated to take more than 30 minutes

(12) If the application will be opposed and the applicant or any respondent has estimated that the time required for the hearing of the application will be more than 30 minutes,
(a) the applicant and each respondent must prepare an outline in Form 125 and the applicant must deliver the applicant's outline to each respondent with or after delivery the applicant's reply affrdavits and at least 7 days before the date set for the hearing, and
each respondent must deliver that respondent's outline to the applicant and to each other respondent at least 2 days before the date set for the hearing,

(i)

of

(ii)

(b) the applicant must compile a chambers record in a ring binder or in some other form of secure binding, (c) the chambers record must contain, in consecutively numbered pages, or separated by tabs, the following documents in the following order:

(i) (ii)

title page bearing the style of proceeding and the names of counsel;

an index;
a copy of the applicant's outline; a copy of the outline of each respondent; a copy of the petition or notice of motion, as the case may be; a copy
a copy

(iii)
(iv) (v) (vi) (vii)

of each response in Form 124;

of every affrdavit, and of every other document other than a written argument, that is to be referred to at the hearing,
(d) the chambers record may contain any of the following:

(i) (ii)

draft order; written argument;

(iii)

list of authorities;

(iv) a draft bill of costs,

(e) the chambers records must not contain

(i) (ii)

affrdavits of service,

copies of authorities, including case law, legislation, legal articles or excerpts from text books, or

(iii)

any other documents unless they are included with the consent of all the parties.

(D the applicant must file, with the notice of hearing and other documents referred to in subrule (3), between 9:00 a.m. on the second court day before, and noon on the day before, the date set for the hearing, or within any other time period set by the Chief Justice by practice direction in relation to the registry in which the filing must occur,

(D the original of every affrdavit,

and of every other document, that

(A)

was delivered by the applicant to a respondent with respect to the application, and

(B) is to be referred to at the hearing, and

(ii)

the chambers record, and

(g) the applicant must deliver a copy of the chambers record index to each respondent by noon the court day before the date set for the hearing. [am. B.C. Reg. 7312001.]

of

If respondent's application is to be heard (13) If

a respondent intends to

at the hearing

bring on an application for hearing at the same time as the applicant's application and the applications together are estimated by any party to take more than 30 minutes to hear, subrule (12) applies and the parties must, so far as is possible, prepare and file a joint chambers record and agree to a date for the hearing of both applications. Chambers record to be returned

(la) Subject to the direction of the judge or master in chambers,

the chambers record to the applicant (a) at the conclusion of the hearing, or

the registrar's clerk must return

(b) if the hearing of the application is adjourned to a date later than the following court day, after that adjournment.
Chambers record to be refiled
has been returned to the applicant under subrule (14) (b), the refile the chambers record between 9:00 a.m. on the second court day before, and applicant must noon on the day before, the new date set for the hearing of the application. Filing amended chambers record

(15) If the chambers record

(16) If any additional affidavits are filed and delivered under Rule l0 (8) or 44 (9), the applicant must file an amended chambers record containing those affidavits. Court file need not be brought to chambers (17) The court file need not be brought into chambers unless
(a) the judge or master hearing the application requests it, or

(b) a party requisitions the court file, by noon on the court day before the date set for the hearing of the application, by filing a requisition to that effect.

[am. B.C. Reg.20112004, s.

l.]
a reasonable

Respondent may apply for directions

time after a respondent has requested the applicant to do so, a rcspondent may apply by requisition on 2 days notice for directions.
[am. B.C. Re9.20112004, s.

(18) If the applicant does not set an application down for hearing within

l.]