4. Roger Callow storms Nova Scotia courts (November 03-2017 Halifax Examiner)

annotated with my COMMENTS (C)



Several forests have died in Roger Callow’s ongoing battle for justice.

C. ...talk about purple language!

Thirty-two years ago, in 1985, West Vancouver social studies teacher Roger Callow was laid off from his unionized job. He’s been fighting for “justice” (or something) ever since.

C. the 'or something' is compensation which must be paid under the law whether it is under the imposed BILL 35, (the only thing the Employer recognizes) or the collective bargaining rules which since 1995, is the only thing that the courts recognize after quashing the arbitration, or any other court measure dealing with employment compensation.)

In 2014, Andrew Duffy, then reporting for the Ottawa Citizen, recapped Callow’s journey through the courts

C. The OTTAWA CITIZEN refused my 'right of rebuttal to a judge whom was referred to the oversight bodies for fraud to which there was no acknowledgment (there never is=no oversight bodies in Canada) The central point is that I was ruled 'frivolous & vexatious' as the defendant against an Employer laid action. The main intent was to divert Google Internet connections which applies to this day as seekers of this site are redirected to a non-existent .com site (rather than .ca site)

In the three decades since, Callow has launched 20 legal proceedings before various tribunals, courts and appeal bodies in a determined attempt to win redress. C. Got that in one


He has tried to personally sue two judges from the Federal Court of Canada; he has also launched multi-million dollar lawsuits against the teacher’s union and the school board.

C. I tried to have judge's orders overturned which is a normal legal action. I have not launched a multi-million dollar action against the Employer and Union.

All of the lawsuits have failed. C. Got that in one...the source of how the Canadian Justice System collapsed in a 'Harvey Weinstein' fashion.

Both the Federal Court and the B.C. Supreme Court have declared him a vexatious litigant and have barred him from filing actions related to his lost job. C. Again, correct explaining why I have lodged actions in 7 other provinces for redress. Not one of those courts would refer to the infamous 'Cullen Creed' (2013) which is clearly ultra vires in that regard which they would have to do in ordering the matter back to B.C.

In fact, the B.C. Supreme Court has issued three separate orders since 2003 that restrict Callow’s access to that province’s court system. C. The 2010 Order (McKenzie Creed) included 'may only proceed with the permission of a judge' which I always ask for. The 2013 Cullen Creed makes no such allowance.

In his decision issued Friday, Justice McKinnon said that Callow has insulted every judge “who has had the misfortune of ruling against him.” C. Got that in one...and for good reasons. In response some time ago to my legal counsel on the question as to universally condemning judges; I replied, "What difference does it make if 90% of judges are doing a good job under very difficult circumstances if the Chief Justice consistently appoints the other 10% to your case?" He got the point.

“Mr. Callow has also been remarkably imaginative in engaging in offensive conduct outside the courtroom, denigrating Canada’s judiciary and legal system,” the judge said. “He has displayed insulting placards in public places and posted offensive material on his website.” C. Justice Ottenbreit of SK told the Employer's Counsel; "This is a court of law. I don't care what is on the internet."

Callow’s website was taken down some time ago, but it was a doozy, with pages of unintelligible garble like this:

C. The web site was perverted by GOOGLE; it was not taken down but the writer appears to have the inside scoop on this piece of perfidy. That's the 'doozy' part of this point.

BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an ‘Outlaw Justice System’ www.employeescasecanada.com (30 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’ which has been through 8 different court systems and over 30 judges. It’s Canada’s Watergate — Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. The ‘find me a court’ plea has fallen on deaf ears due to Registry, Ministry & Court obfuscation. I feel like Ralph Nader in 1961 trying to convince the public of dangerous cars (Unsafe at any speed). Who knows, maybe recalling judges and chief judges may become standard fare in the future — just like automobiles. To be sure, the current system is not working as now the Canadian Justice System has been shattered in its entirety by this case. The current case in Federal Court (T-2360-14) alleges fraud on behalf of the Respondent Employer and Union plus the court processes over the past 30 years. It would appear that the Respondents misrepresented themselves to this petitioner as to the their authority. #550-17008208-157 currently extant in Gatineau, Quebec, will see if the French Canadian courts suffer from this ‘English disease.’ Premier P. Couillard is being kept fully informed as to court progress as well as, now, the Quebec RCMP.

C. Why has the writer limited himself  or herself to the Gatineau Case of a few years ago which was played out right through to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2016 (36883) leaving Prime Minister Trudeau to deal with the fallout of the charges of fraud against Employer lawyers and judges in QC?  He did nothing.

Here’s the first paragraph of Ontario Justice C. McKinnon’s 2014 decision naming Callow a vexatious litigant:

Roger Callow is a litigant possessed of seemingly inexhaustible stamina. His behaviour suggests that he views the Canadian court system as something akin to a perpetual, all-day, all you can eat buffet. Having been rebuked by the courts and tribunals of British Columbia, the Federal Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of Canada, Mr. Callow has now taken aim at Ontario. Ontario lacks the jurisdiction to deal with his case. As a result, Mr. Callow’s litigation must be stopped. Now. C. ...and where are the rules regarding jurisdiction in his judgment which no other court outside of B.C. raises? Notice how he turns this case around in that I was the defendant with the Employer claiming immunity under the imposed legislation feature; an issue buried by every court since 1985 including that of McKinnon.

But there’s no stopping Roger Callow. C. Perhaps not but the Canadian Justice System was stopped in its tracks under Justice Rosinski (Hfx 469918) explaining why I have appealed to President Trump to invoke the Magnitsky Act against him; U.S. commercial interests deserve no less.

Callow has brought his fight to the Nova Scotia Supreme Court. Of course, Nova Scotia has nothing to do with British Columbia, and certainly nothing to do with the West Vancouver school system or its union. And the Nova Scotia Supreme Court can’t overrule decisions made by courts in B.C., Ontario, or Quebec, or by the Canadian Supreme Court, but those technicalities aren’t about to stop Roger Callow. C. Oh, yes it has something to do with Nova Scotia where the teachers went out in protest against the imposed BILL 75 which the government chose to drop. Not only all Canadian teachers, but all union and association employees plus provinces (e.g. SK and MB in challenges to the imposed Carbon Tax are negatively affected. CUPE recently won a $56 million case in ON for its educational workers (although the anti-employee media would not report the matter as a news item)

Further Nova Scotia or any other province may refer matters back (in this case) to B.C. under the legal terms of Referencing which means a direct challenge to the Cullen Creed which no court was prepare to entertain. Much easier to duck down the rabbit hole of 'frivolous and vexatious' on the part of the litigant.    

This week, Callow filed about a half a ream of documents with the Nova Scotia court. It’s all gobbledygook, but from the documents I learn that Callow filed a complaint with the Nova Scotia Barristers Society, but the Society “refused an examination of the fraudulent Employer’s ‘Book of Authorities.'” He therefore took the issue up with Justice Suzanne Hood, who likewise sensibly refused to deal with Callow, and so Callow is now taking aim at the judge  — “her apparently innocuous action was sufficient to show that the court for a first time was heavily biased in favour of the Employer” and so forth. C. The 'gobbledygook' consists of highly fraudulent material filed in the Employer's 500 page 'Book of Authorities' based on the ON 'Bobbsey Twins' actions of Justice McKinnon and 6 months later, Justice Scott (both originally Federal Court appointees therefore coming under the Canadian Council of Judges presided over by SCofC Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and the source of my Placard denigrating her (due to retire December 15 leaving it to the new appointee to deal with this fraud ducked by the SCofC in 2016 and P.M. Trudeau in 2017) The Nova Scotia Barristers Society ducked the examination of this 'Book of Authorities' leaving it to the court to conduct the examination. In April, Justice Suzanne Hood, in an act of 'commission' made no reference to my accusation. Bottom line? A 'Book of Authorities' has no meaning anywhere in Canada.

I fear our courts are about to come to a grinding halt as Callow pursues his case. C. They did just that when Justice Rosinski refused to permit the Constitutional Question to go ahead regarding whether court oversight applies to imposed legislation. And here's the rub. Justice Rosinski read out a pre-written statement detailing my case in the trial  which appears only on the transcript (469918 Hfx) and is completely lacking from the judgment (which is what forms the basis of case law ); a standard legal manoeuvre.  For example, readers of Rosinski's published record could just as easily have concluded that the matter was refused permission to go ahead based on a minor traffic violation; no doubt a reasonable conclusion for such as the above Red Neck writer. (P.S. When my web site is up again, read the original RED NECK MEDIA from 1985...some things never change. And the media is wondering why - apart from the internet  - the reading public is deserting them in droves... fake news, indeed.


Get This Straight(c. 1986)
'...The teacher who was dumped was Roger Callow, and his dismissal (whatever happened to 'lay-off with recall rights'?) will go into the history books along with other great happenings like the invention of the steam engine and the telephone.' (you may yet be right here, Doug)'...Can you remember any other teacher being shown the door for incompetence?...The revolutionary heave-ho of which I speak became possible because the Socreds have brought in BILL 35 (dead on, Doug)...As far as Mr. Callow is concerned, I cannot say whether he is in fact incompetent...(Why not? You did everywhere else in your diatribe)...Enter Mrs. Margot Furk, the schoolboard woman from West Vancouver who looks meek, but isn't...(she looks about as meek as Attila the Hun...and to think Dougy was also criticized for being anti-female) She was one of the leading lobbyists for BILL 35 (Don't forget the role of John Reynolds, local MPP now the federal justice critic for the Reform Party for Christ's sake!) and voted for Callow's removal...'How was it possible, I asked her, that a man who had been employed for 17 years could be incompetent?' "Because in the past no one had the guts to do anything about him," she added smartly...UP THE REVOLUTION' (I'll try, Doug, I'll try...but it seems the revolution has already hoisted you on your own petard and from the sounds of your squealing, you don't like walking the proverbial mile in my boots...Oh, well, I think those boots are far too big for you anyway...so, Doug...enjoy,enjoy the revolutionary heave ho....

ADDENDUM No column from Collins after Arbitration thrown out by the Supreme Court of B.C.



Purple writing ...so you thought columnist Doug Collins could not be outdone? Read on...
Try this editorial c1986 from the North Shore News, Collins' paper which is delivered regularly to the doorstep of the 'meek' school trustee, Margo Furk, and her ilk. (If nothing else, Doug, West Vancouver may be known for many things but I don't believe it has ever been known to be meek and, contrary to the parable, they do expect to rule the earth, the justice system notwithstanding!)
In response to the editorial, employers may indeed remove an employee for any trumped up accusation; as long as they are prepared to pay appropriate compensation. What happened here is that the skinflint School Board believed that by 'laying off' an employee with so-called recall rights, those so-called 'responsible' school board trustees could escape their compensatory obligations. That is one of the reasons why this case affects the rights and interests of every Canadian employee.


Friday, September 19, 1986 - North Shore News  News Viewpoint

Right to fire


(PULITZER PRIZE anyone? or Why the B.C. North Shore News has delisted contact with me. Read on and see the whole conspiracy unfold)

Want to help? Residents of the North Shore should tell advertisers in the North Shore News why they are boycotting their business.

Jan./07 - NOTE: The North Shore News is a community newspaper catering to many judges and their ilk resident in North and West Vancouver.
In many ways the above article is symbolic of a Canadian media intent on ‘not getting the story’. All Canadians are the poorer for such blatant support of this ‘Old Boys’ Club’ mentality.

'...She knew journalists. Some were intelligent, many stupid. A few believed in telling the truth; the majority just wrote the most sensational story they could get away with....'   Whiteout    Ken Follett

"In Canada, if an issue falls in a forest and it goes unreported in the press, it does not make a sound"

B.C. Columnist Doug Collins
The Jerry Springer of the North Shore News fined for carrying one of his racist columns. His epitath: 'Zapped by the Jewish Lobby,1999; corpse to follow'
'While no-one would question Collins' personal war record (WWII veteran), does anyone know which side he fought on?...Does Doug Collins?( BLACK ROGER c.1986) So West Vancouver School Board has announced it is going to spend another $10,000 to appeal a Supreme Court decision that ruled against the board for firing long-time teacher Roger Callow.    

The board's plan to appeal comes after Justice Mary Southin ruled that arbitrator Louis Lindholm should not have approved the firing of the 44-year-old social studies teacher under Bill 35 last year.

B.C. Teacher's Federation took the board to court over the arbitrator's decision, expressing its fear that the firing would set a precedent, whereby teachers would be fired without sufficient reason.

But the Board claims it fired Callow because he did not show present demonstrated ability, and the teachers are not arguing that point!

What has the world come to when an employer cannot fire an employee because he is not doing his job effectively? Are the rest of the teachers so insecure about their own present demonstrated abilities that they have to band together like a group of superstitious old women, fighting off an enemy that doesn't exist?

And now the school board plans to sink a further $10,000 of taxpayer's money, on top of the over $15,000 it has already spent, into an appeal that should never have warranted a court case in the first place.

Let's quit wasting time, money and energy on court battles, and have qualified teachers teach our children, and the responsible school board members manage our education system.

(presumably an election makes school trustees responsible...If so, why did they not do the responsible thing and take the stand and 'perjure' themselves as to lay-off numbers? As the press boycotted this high profile case in the first place, how can they claim to know what went on ...or do they really care about good journalistic principles? RWC



...or how about this one in 2003 if you have the stomach to read this bilge....


December 19 /06 - Research has produced this gem from the North Shore News dated 04/06/03/04/23/03. All media as a courtesy have been asked to forward accounts on the Employee's Case (Canada) to this writer. www.employeescase.com  Presumably, the above 'red rag' (see two other articles on this topic in this newspaper under 'MEDIA' on website.) ‘forgot’ to forward a copy of this following 'Old Boys' Club’ disinformation account. (Of course I would have requested equal time for rebuttal should I have been made aware of this article at the time.) My observations on the article follow in italics.

Laidoff W. Van teacher no longer can sue
Colin Wright cwright@nsnews.com

As far as a B.C. Supreme Court judge is concerned, a former West Vancouver teacher who was terminated 17 years ago by the trustees of West Vancouver School District 45, has exhausted all his legal options in his quest to get his job back.


1) It has not been established in a court of law that , as the targeted individual, I was indeed laid off by the school trustees. Probably not, according to information produced in the arbitration which was later quashed by the courts as a means, I submit, of covering-up this strategic information. The court ordered the matter back to arbitration. As the School Board had already contravened the School Act by cutting my salary before the arbitration was completed and as the judge failed to re-instate salary until the renewed arbitration, the School District believed they were under no compunction to do anything.

2) What is basically at question here is appropriate financial compensation which is governed in this case by contract. Williamson would see no compensation to flow in this case and yet all parties - the Employer, the Union, and myself as the targeted teacher- all agreed that some compensation was due under the contract and the terms of the lay-off. That is why his judgment is unconscionable, particularly as it was the courts which earlier ordered a re-arbitration. Surely they had an obligation to see that the re-arbitration was held in this career-ending decision. As such Williamson was merely ducking out of his legal responsibilities in this matter.

3) Justice Southin noted in her judgment (1986) in which she quashed the arbitration ruling, as she did, that the arbitrator had been ‘patently unreasonable’ and that ‘nothing was adduced in evidence which would suggest that the School Trustees intended to lay-off a teacher in June of 1985'. She recommended that employment ‘should’ (as opposed to ‘must’) be returned to Callow. Williamson would gloss over this material and defer to the Union/Employer argument which follows.

In dismissing two recent lawsuits that teacher Roger Callow had brought against the West Vancouver Teachers’ Association (WVTA) and the school district, Justice Paul Williamson took the relatively rare judicial step of invoking Section 18 of the Supreme Court of B.C. that orders Callow not to launch further legal proceedings in any court without leave (permission) of the court.

In effect, a muzzle order which placed me ‘outside the law’ in this unresolved case; a first for any democratic country.

In his reasons for judgment, Williamson said “this plaintiff (Callow) has persistently and without reasonable grounds instituted vexatious legal proceedings in this court. The grounds and issues have been rolled forward from one proceeding to the next. The same issues have been raised repeatedly in circumstances where it is obvious the action cannot succeed.”


Williamson is merely mimicking the Employer/Union argument. The only issue discussed was whether I could represent myself in court against the Union’s objection to finalize this legal matter. I believed that I had that power anyway but in this case of over 30 judges up to and including the Supreme Court of Canada on two occasions, the answer was a repeated ‘no’ leaving this case ‘unresolved’. That is how the Canadian Justice System imploded due to ‘systematic’ injustice.

Lloyd McKenzie, information officer for the B.C. Court of Appeal and the B.C. Supreme Court, said such orders do happen periodically.

Oh, oh, the beginning of the disinformation by drawing in authorities whose pronouncements will be twisted to support the reporter’s point of view.

“There are people who take lawsuits before the court without substance,” McKenzie said. “And, occasionally such orders have to be made.. There are people who are consistent suers. It becomes a vocation for them and they just flail away at the proverbial dead horse.”

 I read those case studies. None of them even remotely connect to the Employee’s Case (Canada). Williamson made up the law on this case. However, the reporter has established in the reader’s mind that we are dealing with a whacko; all it requires now is to acquire a few whacko quotes from Callow’s web site to prove that ‘all is well in authority land’. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Callow, who now lives in Ottawa, taught at West Vancouver’s Hillside junior high (since demolished)- surely Wright is not going to blame me for that one although I wouldn’t put it past him!- from 1969 to 1984. Hillside was a full secondary school.

In 1984, he transferred to West Vancouver secondary where he taught social studies but, within a year, he was suddenly laid off. On his Web site, Callow states he was laid off for “whistleblowing” but what whistle he blew, and why, is not explained.

 Oh yes it is. No wonder Wright didn’t include the web address in his report.

Nevertheless, he’s been fighting his layoff through the B.C. court system ever since, and, despite Williamson’s March 11 ruling, Callow says his legal battle will continue.

“It will be appealed,” he told the North Shore News when contacted at his Ottawa home. ‘My legal counsel is preparing the appeal now. We have 30 days to appeal it and I’ll be posting it on my Web site.”

Again, no web site address. This was the sum total and only conversation I ever had with the North Shore News although reading on in this report, one is left with the impression that many other things were said.

Callow’s trip through the B.C. judicial system and the Labor Relations Board (LRB) began in 1985 when, after being terminated, he grieved his termination under the B.C. School Act and on Jan. 28, his grievance was dismissed by the arbitrator
...without a hearing

Next, the WVTA (Union) sought a judicial review of the case on Callow’s behalf in which the court ruled the arbitrator had erred in his award and sent the matter back to the arbitrator for a re-hearing on specific issues. The trustees board appealed this decision, but the B.C. Court of Appeal dismissed it.

A long way from what Justice Southin said in her indictment. Who peddled this line to a gullible Wright, ...the Union?

For the next two years, according to Williamson’s synopsis, Callow “was involved in a dispute with the association on how the re-hearing should be conducted” - but in November of 1989, the arbitrator died.
Without placing individual School Trustees on the stand to testify to lay-off figures (16 new positions created with no lay-offs), which the Union would not do and why the authorities not incorrectly felt they were looking at a ‘sweetheart deal’, there is no case. With that much said, there was nothing stopping the School Trustees from returning to court which they would have, I submit, if I had been retained on salary as per contract regulations.

Callow surfaced again six years later, this time to petition the B.C. Supreme Court to set aside the arbitrator’s award, quash the dismissal and reinstate him in his job with the West Vancouver school district.

How do you ‘quash’ something that does not exist in the first place? ...’alleged’ dismissal. Wright has me defending a negative which is an impossibility.

However, the courts ruled they had no jurisdiction in the matter and that Callow was bound by the settlement reached by its association. Callow tried to appeal this decision to the Supreme Court of Canada, but was denied an appeal there.

That’s the whole point. The Union never signed any settlement despite my legal Counsel’s insistence on that point. Otherwise, I would have been in a legal position to sue them leaving the whole sorry mess to be publicized...and that would never do. See web site regarding the failure of the Supreme Court to hear the ‘universality of Unions’ question which continues to go unanswered and explains why NHL Hockey Player Yashin was also denied status to have his case heard while a ballet dancer with Union Association membership was heard and even won in court. That’s why we are looking at a massive political football. (Professor Martin in his book on the topic labeled the Supreme Court of Canada as being ‘highly political’)

Callow then took the dispute before the LRB, but it was dismissed on first hearing and dismissed again on reconsideration. Callow then applied to the B.C. Court of Appeal for a judicial review of the LRB’s decision, but that appeal process was also denied. Meanwhile Callow had launched lawsuits against the WVTA and the West Vancouver school district (seeking $1 million in damages from the former and $2 million from the latter) for “conspiring to terminate his employment and refusing to reinstate him.”

This paragraph must have been written in the editorial offices of the Union. Conspicuous by its absence is the fact that the Union dropped representation of the case while one and at the same time refusing Callow the necessary legal sanction (I always believed I had that anyway) to finalize the issue with the School District. As the School Trustees dropped their ‘dollar offer’, the courts would now have no choice but to intervene in this matter and finalize the case.( Subsequent to this article, a second Appeal was made to the Supreme Court of Canada on the grounds that desertion of this unresolved case by both the School Trustees and the Union called the court’s rule of ‘inherent jurisdiction’ into play to finalize the matter. See web site for that ‘Preamble’ which serves as an indictment of the Canadian judiciary. In effect, the judiciary permitted the Employer/Union to stall in this ‘sweetheart’ case until they deserted the matter; that is what the Supreme Court of Canada condoned as they were the only court to deal with the case after the desertion.

A master of the B.C. Supreme Court dismissed both these applications. In the most recent decision against Callow, Williamson cited a 1990 Alberta Court of Appeal judgment that indicated once a person is represented by an association in a collective bargaining circumstance “he lost his right to self-representation.”

Our point exactly. The Union must sign a settlement...then I have the legal right to sue them. One of the more despicable acts by the Justice System, and there were many, was when the Employer, the Union and the LRB appeared before the master in question without my presence as I had been kept totally in the dark as to the hearing date. The Vancouver Justice System refused to investigate that gross piece of miscarriage of justice. The Appeal Judge also chose to ignore this major transgression.

The current legal issue, Callow said, involves disclosure. He claims the West Vancouver school board is obligated to produce the documents and minutes from the meetings at which his layoff was discussed and provide the reasons why he was laid off. Wright implies a conversation with me which he did not have. He’s merely reading my web site. The documents in question were provided to Justice Southin at her request in 1986. As such, the Union was in possession of a copy of said documents. The Union steadfastly refused and no judge would order those documents to be turned over to me. Documents in my possession would suggest that, indeed, Justice Southin’s statement in 1986 was correct; namely, that I was not laid off by the School Trustees. Evidence from the quashed arbitration from the Assistant Superintendent, Bill May, responsible for staffing - conspicuous by its absence from the arbitrator’s report - was that the School Trustees did not recommend the lay-off of any teacher in June of 1985 thus confirming Justice Southin’s observation.

In the wake of Williamson’s order, Callow said he has written to the Canadian Judicial Council of Judges (CJCJ) to investigate Williamson on the grounds of “a gross dereliction of duty”. Again, Wright has picked that up from my web site..

Callow notes that if the CJCJ does not see fit to conduct such investigation “it should close up shop.” from web site. The CJCJ have their own problems...see earlier comments by Professor Martin.