Justice Barnes is an able honorable Judge!

Once upon a midnight dreary, while I pondered WEAK and WEARY, over many a quaint and curious volume of 'forgotten' lore,while I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping, as if someone was tapping tapping at my chamber door! Sorry can't remember the rest,. Reminds me of what is going on, think this was ca

Ed "the raven"

I feel the same, bigrex.

Never say Never.

Well, for all we know Ward Branch and the DoJ lawyers could be teleconferencing every day to get the deal modified to meet any of the judges concerns. So if the judge did suggest the proposal be modified, it would likely be up to the GoC to add to the proposal, not take things away, so PD may not be needed to oversee these talks.

I know, I'm hoping against hope here and my logical side says that this isn't happening, but another side of me just doesn't want to get screwed over again, regardless of how "fair" the deal appears in the eyes of the court.

BigRex, That is certainly something to be hopeful about but, can the proposal be rewritten by Peter while he sits on the beach and sips an umbrella drink?

ok good point to research thanks.from what ive read so far yes he can point out areas of concern wich of course come with a rejection.however in chambes before a disision maybe i think i have read that but uncirtin i will have to re read.he can add in cirtin circumstances non material things on his own say requireing the GOC to provide a letter to the CRA not to charge deemed tax.although i doubt we fall into those circumstances and not sure if a letter like that can be concidered non material.

propat

K9 , I followed you addressing the judge in Halifax and agree with what you are saying, but as 6608 and others have pointed out, the judge actually has a lot of leeway for extraordinary cases. He may very well have told both parties, in his chambers, that he is concerned that the proposal does not include damages or better tax considerations, and asked if the lawyers would agree to modify the proposal to meet these concerns. If he did, that may explain a bit of a delay in approving or denying the settlement.

It is all the same, or he accepts or rejects, yes or no, nothing more. Back to sender or done deal, if a done deal, fees and stipend and finished.
Not more. All this with the resoning that goes with it. That is what was said, both parties can change stuff if sent back but not the Judge. Anyways, all this to say that waiting is not bad itself, we could have had on te bench a rapid decision saying go, accepted, go 17.... Percent fees, go, 50 000$ stipend, here it is, are you happy now, those who wanted a kick one got it.
I prefer to wait a bit and get an intelligent and toughtfull result by Judge Barnes.

But again, no offense, that is only me. I was in Halifax and gave alout to Judge Barnes to think about and consider, with caselaw and jurisprudence to back it up, all this with and for some here who had concerns, if those were listened to and have an effect on the decision, I will be happy about it.

Chears.

K9...........The rule of “reasonableness” requires that judges be flexible when reviewing proposed class settlements. They cannot, however, change or rewrite settlements; they can only approve or deny them, or impose conditions upon them.They cannot reject a proposed settlement simply because they disagree with its terms and substance or would have concluded it differently.They can only reject it if they consider it “inadequate or unfair or unreasonable.”

Vitapharm, supra note 47 (“The function of a court in reviewing a settlement is not to reopen and enter into negotiations with litigants in the hope of possibly improving the terms of the settlement. It is within the power of the court to indicate areas of concern and afford the parties an opportunity to answer those concerns with changes to the settlement. However, the court's power to approve or reject settlements does not permit it to modify the terms of a negotiated settlement”)

cheers

No offence, the Judge as only the choice to accept or reject the proposition, no interference, since both sides agreed!
Then if it is a go, the percentage for fees and stipend are the only thing he as a say to, if he rejects the deal, he will give the reasons in is decision.

All this take time, it is a Court Decision, it will be there for others to compare, it as to be written, the corrected, signed, then translated, it needs good explanation, this all take time. In normal time it would take more then 3 months,
Time is painfull, but things have to be done properly, some have been loosing since 1976, what is a couple of weeks more.....

Chears.

I Like the analogy that bigrex has stated here, and I totally agree with him, although I am a bit confused as to what the judge can do about the proposal. I think that the judge has already made his decision on the fees, and like bigrex has suggested adding or fine tuning the proposal without rejecting it, I'm wondering if the judge can do this?
If the GOC would volunteer something behind close doors, would this not amend or change the proposal, without the judge rejecting it ?

greatfoot i didnt do the kitshop thing i was only between hospital and home never did go back to work.for 2 years they just kept misplacing my paperwork until i hit my 20.not sure how they did it for others.oh they took some time to do some work on me before i left as well.

propat

Wrongful dismissal, I like the sound of that...

I was released in 2003 because I didn't meet the Universality of Service requirements, yet today, and I am not knocking the individual I see, I see guys without legs working in the kit shop until their time is up. I was fast-tracked out to get me out before 10 years so they wouldn't have to pension me.

How does a guy without a leg, or an arm, meet the universality of service clause for being a tanker?

Wrongful dismissal, I'll follow that road if it comes up.

Well maybe the judge will have a compromise request for the lawyers. He may say that in order for him to approve the proposal and get the retro payments to start flowing, he may request the lawyers negotiate further compensation and add it as an annex to the proposal, to be paid later, without having to deny the proposal altogether or delay the currently agreed to payments

That is the thing with the Law, there is no cookie cutter settlements, because each case has it's own unique characteristics The federal courts rules can only be used as a guideline, but I'm sure in the face of extraordinary circumstances, the judge has the right to circumvent some common limitations. We are a unique type of class action other than Tainted blood and residential school cases. We are also a unique type of victim, because we are in this position because of the risks and hardships that we faced for our country. When we were sent into harms way, they knew that many would come back broken, and because of the clawback, the GoC knew right from the beginning that they would and could reduce their financial liability to us for our injuries because of this clawback. In fact , the clawback gave them financial incentive to prematurely release many of us from the military, over the last several years, instead of allowing us to fill other less physically demanding or less stressful positions in the CF, which could constitute wrongful dismissal on top of everything else. At the time, the GoC was unaware that people were being infected through blood transfusions, or it wouldn't have happened, nor did they know that students would be abused physically, mentally and sexually, if they were sent to a residential school, or they would not have been sent. So in many ways, the GoC treated us with far more disrespect than anyone else, and continue to do so, because they knowingly and willfully victimized us from the very beginning and are now refusing to properly compensate us or even apologize for it.

Wait, how much longer? it is not beneficial to those with anxiety disorders. Perhaps you fall in a different category however, people here deserved the cash yesterday, not to be screwed around and told to wait and shut up.

Greatfoot, is RIGHT!