Canadian Soldiers Assistance Team (CSAT) Forum


Join the forum, it's quick and easy

Canadian Soldiers Assistance Team (CSAT) Forum
Canadian Soldiers Assistance Team (CSAT) Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 19:38

Vall2012, you have every right to state what you feel and you do indeed have a very valid point. Good luck

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 19:22

vall2012, you opinion is as good as any of us, I may not agree 100% but I sue as hell respect it. You worked hard and you most deffenetally deserve to speak out as any on of us, good work, stand proud!

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 19:18

today - I had to drive to Cornwall and back to just get outside this mess - And Sparrow and many got me the good guidance - This letter will reach its destination on time.

Thanks -

Cheers


Last edited by Vall2012 on Mon 04 Feb 2013, 19:14; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 19:15

Thank guys - pleasure to see some support - I don't think MC will like me - After all they setup this legal fees scheme.

Thank for your kind word - private or in this forum.

Cheers
Vall2012


Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 19:11

Vall I used GoogleTranslation no problem. Stay strong.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 19:09

Thanks sparrow for support

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 19:09

Its going to be in the mail tomorrow - with all the options signature, proof of delivery etc.
please give MCinnis address for cross check and the honorable judge postal code in Halifax if you have it.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 18:41

Grammar wrote:Vall2012 vous avez besoin pour envoyer ce avant le 7 Novembre N'attendez pas merci

Envoyer une copie à McInnes Cooper et demandez-leur de le lire dans le compte rendu de la colonie.

English Translation:
Vall2012 you need to send this before February 7 Do not wait thank you
Send a copy to McInnes Cooper and ask them to read the account of the colony.
Grammar



Last edited by SPARROW. on Sun 03 Feb 2013, 20:59; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : forgot one line of translation)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 18:40

grammar you mean fevrier

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 18:39

i think if he sent it by november 7th it would be little late

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 18:34

Vall2012 vous avez besoin pour envoyer ce avant le 7th N'attendez pas merci

Envoyer une copie à McInnes Cooper et demandez-leur de le lire dans le compte rendu de la colonie.


Last edited by Grammar on Sun 03 Feb 2013, 18:45; edited 1 time in total

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Guest Sun 03 Feb 2013, 18:23

Gatineau– February 4 - 2013
To:
The Honourable Justice Barnes
Federal Court,
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0H9.

From:
VALL2012

Reference: Court Number : T-463-07
Style of Cause : DENNIS MANUGE v. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
Proceeding Category : Actions
Nature : Others - Crown (v. Queen) [Actions]
Type of Action : Ordinary

Honorable Mr. Justice Barnes
It is a great honor to write to you regarding this case. I won’t talk about my own situation but would like to bring to your attention a potentially serious cause for concern.

After a lengthy pause, I revisited the entire Settlement agreement and example provided to us by MCInnis Cooper. (See Site: Leavenovetbehind.ca.). Despite the fact that these examples of settlement and fees provided by McInnis Cooper are hypothetical, they explained how Legal Fees will be charged to all Class members.

If approved, this Legal fees scheme will be establish in accordance to those two hypothetical examples. It will create a serious problem. For some member, like example 1, legal fees are imposed as low as 5.1% and for example 2 they are at 17.83%. This explains why we have a possible Sub-Class that exists within the Broad Class.

Possible Sub-Class within the Broad Class;

After reviewing the two examples provided by McInnis Cooper, (See Annex 1 below); I arrive to the following conclusion:
• Member 1 (Broad Class) Will pay only 5.1%, Legal Fees, when we consider all future payment own to him and in the longer term, absolve from all legal fees.
• Member 2 (Potential Sub-Class) will be paying a flat rate of 17.83% Legal Fees, in one single and final payment.

Analysis:
In this example, there is an obvious distinction between the hypothetical Members 1 set at 5.1% and hypothetical Members 2 set at 17.83%. A difference of 12.73% between both hypothetical members.

The reason is simple;
A) For the Member of the Example 1, The Settlement charge partial legal fees on the sum of monies that will be paid at settlement date and ignore legal fees for payment arising at a later date. Therefore: We can conclude that all members similar to example 1 will be impose a < variable % > of legal fees which, in time will continue to be dissolve, by the amount of settlement money they receive.

B) For Member of the Example 2, The Settlement charges a fixed legal fee that will be paid by those members, at the settlement date. Those members wont received any future payment. Therefore: We can conclude that all members similar to example 2 are impose a < fixed % > of legal fees, much more superior that members similar to example 1.

Unintended or not, our class action counsel representing this Class Action, have created a clear conflict of interest between a potential Broad Class and a potential Sub-Class: The Broad-Class are imposed legal fee at a variable % and the potential Sub-Class imposed legal fees at fixed %. Our counsel have opted, to ignore the full settlement monies and opted to charge the highest legal fees to the lowest beneficiary of this class.

The Cause and effect of this practice is easy to understand:
A) Broad Class Member 1: Member who recovers more, over time / will pay a lesser variable % of legal fees.
B) Sub-Class Member 2: Member who recovers less (one time payment) / pay the highest fixed rated % of legal cost.

Conclusion: All members should pay the same percentage of legal fees based on the entire settlement amount regardless of future payment. Future payments are integral part of the same settlement money and legal fees are based on the entire settlement amount.

Individual Questions:
1. Does The Honourable Justice Barnes considers that establishing two legal fees scheme ( a variable %) and (a fixed %), is an equitable legal fees scheme for all members of class ?

2. Does The Honourable Justice Barnes considers that the legal fees should be based on the entire amount of the settlement money and imposes equally among the entire class members?

3. Does The Honourable Justice Barnes considers that by establishing this legal fees scheme it create a conflict of interest between the two type of Class Member ?

The federal Court Rules 334.4 specifically indicate that No payments, including indirect payments, shall be made to a solicitor from the proceeds recovered in a class proceeding unless the payments are approved by a judge.

The Honourable Justice Barnes should consider this legal fees scheme before approving these payments.

Appeal
As I belong to the example of the Member 2, and imposed a fixed % of legal cost, I therefore, under section 334.31 (1) of the Federal Court Rules, and as a member of this class action, I wish to use my right of appeal and initiates an appeal regarding these three questions. If such appeal is required by the The Honourable Justice Barnes in order to provide answer to those individual questions.

Request for delay in filing a proper notice of appeal under the federal Court rules.
Considering that I am a simple class member, who is not a lawyer, I would like to request from The Honorable Justice Barnes, the indulgence to grant me 30 days to file a proper notice of appeal regarding this matter. I would need to be assisted by our class action counsel.
In the event that The Honorable Mr. Justice Barnes considers our class council in a potential conflict of interest because they have set in motion this legal fees scheme, I would respectfully request The Honorable Justice Barnes to grant me counsel, at the crown cost to file a notice of appeal. If those two options are not possible, I will possibly consider covering the cost of such an appeal.

Cost for GOC an DOJ
Further to this – The Honorable Justice Barnes should also take into consideration the following;
The real intention from GOC and DOJ from the beginning was to discourage, by this vexatious measure or unnecessary and excessive caution, an individual to access and file a class action proceeding against the crown.
Their conduct have delayed this settlement and imposed to the Canadian Taxpayer and the plaintiff additional cost for no reason. For this highly unethical conduct, it should be imputed to DOJ and GOC, at the Honorable Justice Barnes discretion, a fair portion of the legal cost of this class action. And this after considering that those tactics have not only delayed this case but where also vexatious, unnecessary and demonstrated an unnecessary excessive caution in an attempt to discourage the plaintiff to the point of requiring an unanimous ruling in favor of the plaintiff by The Supreme court of Canada.

It would be therefore appropriate and reasonable for the Honorable Justice Barnes, to held GOC and DOJ accountable for at least 100% of the Legal cost, if not, a large portion of it.

The Court Cost
As for Cost under article 334.39 Subject to subsection (2), no costs may be awarded against any party to a motion for certification of a proceeding as a class proceeding, to a class proceeding or to an appeal arising from a class proceeding, unless:
• The conduct of the party unnecessarily lengthened the duration of the proceeding;
• Any step in the proceeding by the party was improper, vexatious or unnecessary or was taken through negligence, mistake or excessive caution; or
• Exceptional circumstances make it unjust to deprive the successful party of costs.
Honorable Justice Barnes, 334.39 is clear; our legal representative successfully demonstrated to you and brought before you, unconditional evidences (ombudsman and legal studies, parliamentary Comities, Pressure from media and politician, proof etc…) that:
1 - The defendant unnecessarily lengthened the duration of the proceeding;

2 - Any step in the proceeding by the party was improper, vexatious or unnecessary or was taken through negligence, mistake or excessive caution;

3- And there was no exceptional circumstance to justify this conduct.

Considering these actions, the Honorable Justice Barnes should highly consider attributing the full court cost of this proceeding to the GOC.

Conclusion

Under 334.29 (1) A class proceeding may be settled only with the approval of a judge. I trust the Honorable Justice Barnes will consider all the facts and questions brought before you in this letter and either; Stop this settlement until a satisfactory legal fees scheme equitable to all members of class is found or else impose to GOC the full legal cost and the court cost of this Class Action.

Respectfully
……………VALL2012

___________________________________________________
Signed in Gatineau on Febuary 4th 2013 in the province of Quebec



Appendix 1 – Examples of settlement and fees on a hypothetical member- Jan 11, 2013
Source: http://leavenovetbehind.ca/content/Examples%20of%20settlement%20and%20fees.pdf

(Member 1)
Disabled since January 1999 at the age of 30 with an initial Pension Act reduction of $1,500 per
Month. Lump sum based on retroactive payments up to September 30, 2012. Future amounts
Based on additional estimated payments from October 1, 2012 to age 65 as a result of Settlement.

Amount Recover: 372,982
Legal fees, disbursements, HST: 66,504
Pre-tax Amount payable: 306,485
Increase in Future SISIP LTD amount: 618,191
Legal fees, disbursements, HST on Future payments: [ NONE ]
Total amount of potential pre-tax recovery: $924,676
Plus Scholarship Fund: 1300 (disregarded in calculation)

COMPUTATION
Amount Recover + Future recovery: 372982 + 924676= 1,297,658
Legal fees: 66504 / 1,297,658 = 5.1% Legal Fees, Potential Broad-Class (Member 1)
--------------

(Member 2)
Disabled for 2 years (or more) in 2001-2002 with an initial Pension Act reduction of $500 per month. Total amount of potential pre-tax recovery: $16,458. Currently Working - Does not anticipate Future Amount.

Amount Recover: 18,447
Legal fees, disbursements, HST: 3,289
Pre-tax amount payable: 15,158
Increase in Future SISIP LTD amount: 0.00
Scholarship Fund: 1,300 (disregarded)

COMPUTATION
Amount Recover + Future recovery: 18447 + 0.00 = 18447
Legal Fees: 3289 / 18447 = 17.83% Legal Fees, Potential Sub-Class (Member 2)



Last edited by Vall2012 on Mon 04 Feb 2013, 15:24; edited 12 times in total (Reason for editing : typo correction - Polishing)

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC Empty Re: Letter to Justice Barnes - Filed to Federal Court & Sent to MC

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum