employeescasecanada.ca 2019 RECENT 5 (cc Governor General) File no. 19-0903 Victoria Registry


B.C. Supreme Court Civil Rules

Rule 1-3 Object of Rules


(1)The object of these Supreme Court Civil Rules is to secure the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of every proceeding on its merits. Response (R) All Registries which I have encountered operate under a high level of stress-due mainly to pressure from above?


(2)Securing the just, speedy and inexpensive determination of a proceeding on its merits includes, so far as is practicable, conducting the proceeding in ways that are proportionate to

(a)the amount involved in the proceeding, $20 million forfeiture amount

(b)the importance of the issues in dispute, and R. as adjudged by the bench hence the single most important case in Canadian jurisprudence can be written off as being 'frivolous & vexatious' on the part of the plaintiff in this unresolved labour matter where no compensation has been paid.

(c)the complexity of the proceeding. R. disclosure is quite clear in this case.

Consequence if fact not responded to

(8)An allegation of fact in a notice of civil claim, if not admitted, denied or stated to be outside the knowledge of the defendant, is deemed to be outside the knowledge of the defendant. R. As the Defendant Union does not appear, the court must act in that vacuum; that is the law.

When presumed facts need not be pleaded

(3)A party need not plead a fact if

(a)the fact is presumed by law to be true, or R. The court must accept as true a plaintiff's account if it is not rebutted

(b)the burden of disproving the fact lies on the other party. R. I have been unsuccessful in getting the plaintiff to file as to why they will not provide me as a Union client with my copy of the named disclosure.

Substance to be answered

(15)If a party in a pleading denies an allegation of fact in the previous pleading of the opposite party, the party must not do so evasively but must answer the point of substance. R. The central problem lies not so much with the failure of the Employer and Union to provide disclosure; it lies with over 50 judges whom refuse to request that disclosure which was earlier filed with B.C. Justice Mary Southin in 1986. In brief, she covered up a fraud and the succeeding courts have been guilty of covering up a cover-up. No Justice System can withstand that charge and expect credibility.

Application to judge or master (RULE 3-8 DEFAULT JUDGMENT R.C.)

(8)If a registrar is not certain that a plaintiff's claim against a defendant relates to a claim within subrule (3), (5) or (6), the registrar may refuse to grant judgment and the plaintiff may apply to a judge or master for default judgment. R. So far I have not experienced this type of diversion as a Judge always handles this matter as requested by me.

Rule 9-3 Special Case

Statement of special case

(1)The parties to a proceeding may concur in stating a question of law or fact, or partly of law and partly of fact, in the form of a special case for the opinion of the court. R. A Judicial Enquiry is merited although fraught with the problem noted above. I have asked Premiers and courts such as for Saskatoon QGB 52 of 2019 for the appointment of a Special Prosecutor otherwise I am limited to requesting the above named disclosure.

With a Special Prosecutor, I could formalize the other two challenges; namely, the alleged fraudulency of named judges and the constitutionality of the imposed BILL 35 (B.C. 1985) which is of current concern across Canada. It should be noted here that all three parties at one time or another have asked for clarification on the constitutionality of BILL 35. I would not tie up court time on the latter account bowing to court directives in handling those matters apart from this case where I merely provide the necessary written material for the purpose. My focus is on disclosure.


(signed) Roger Callow (Plaintiff) April 07-2019




April 07-2019 web: employeescasecanada.ca 2 pages plus 2 page extension (above) to GG


TO: Her Excellency the Right Honourable Julie Payette / Rideau Hall / 1 Sussex Dr. Ott.K1A 0A1

(Sent by snail mail) by way of response to:

Michael Magone Registry Technician / Court Registry PO Box 9248 / STN PROV GOVT / Victoria BC V8W 9J2 t.250-356-6223 f. 250-387-3061 Sent by fax

FROM: Roger Callow Plaintiff 19 1903 Victoria Registry 1285 Cahill Dr. #2001 Ott. K1V 9A7



Dear Mr. Magone,

1) Whom persuaded you to write this inane letter? Victoria Chief Justice Robert Bauman?


2) The significance of addressing my response to you via the GG follows on dealing directly with concerns voiced in your letter of March 28,2019 received April 05-2019 which follows.


3) The letter reads in total:

The enclosed notice of application is being returned to you as it does not comply with Rules 8-1(4) (f) and (g); also it appears to be a copy.

I have included the practice directives with respect to requesting a matter be heard by telephone and our chambers procedure also the Rule regarding the application record.

If you have any questions with respect to this please contact me at the above number.

Michael Magone / Registry Technician


3) Included in your account under Contents of notice of application is the following with (f) and (g) highlighted: FORM 32 (RULE 8-1(4):

(f) subject to rules (5) and (6), set out the date and time of the hearing of the application,

My response: I have written the date leaving it to the court to tell me to be available (from 10:00 AM -to 4 P.M. which is standard for all other Registries across Canada). Surely that latter picayune point is no substantial reason justifying this letter. If necessary, consider this letter as denoting 10 A.M.

(g) set out the place for the hearing of the application in accordance with Rule 8-2,and

My response: On Form 3 beneath the file No. (19 1903) is the wording Victoria Supreme Court

(unless of course, this matter is to be tied up with some strange application of Rule 8-2 which is not included.) No space is included for the address which is standard for other Registries.

P.S. All forms are 'copies'; the only distinction to be made is with regards to original and copied signatures.


4) In summary, I am returning FORM 32 without any adjustment along with the fee requested. I have a problem as to whom may assist Mr. Magone in this matter as one form includes the name of Vancouver Chief Justice, C. Hinckson whom is included in a fraud charge in a venue outside of B.C. for an earlier serious aberrant Decision which the B.C. Attorney General D. Edy did not investigate. The AB court (SEE web) bungled this matter on April 4-2019 leaving me with yet another judge to be added to my list of judges facing a fraud charge.


5) Surely this case is not rocket science. As the Union never appears, this matter will be over in 5 minutes with the presiding Justice stating 'yes, he will acquire the limited defined disclosure or he won't, followed with a written explanation. Surely nothing for anyone to get their testicles in an uproar. The point here is that disclosure would, from my knowledge of the original arbitration and court response in 1985, most assuredly illustrate criminal activity from which all action flowing from it would become null and void. Is this what you are covering up?


Yours truly, (signed) Roger Callow


Dear Ms. Payette, Governor General of Canada

1) Forgive me for not using the honorifics considering your titular role which is not to say that the GG can draw the attention of the PM to any matter of concern which the 34 year unresolved labour case where no compensation has been paid contrary to any number of extant laws due to systematic judicial abuse which goes unchecked, would qualify.


2) However, there are a few situations which require executive action such as earlier when the GG decided to continue with an incumbent Tory government even though there was no constitutional question raised. Earlier, I requested the B.C. Lieutenant Governor to initiate action to resolve the unique case above which was within their power only to have them duck out (under B.C. Premier Horgan's directive, no doubt) continuing the ongoing crisis which now sees a B.C. Chief Justice included in a fraud charge in a venue outside B.C. My concern here relates to judicial interference in the Registry which is not an uncommon occurrence in this case explaining why copies of any action are included to Premiers with B.C. Premier Horgan already committed to the conspiracy. Hence copies of B.C. events are placed in the surrogate office of the Governor General.


3) The focus of the Governor General should relate to the role of the 'individual' in Canadian society consistent with the 1982 Bill of Rights and United Nations objectives. Those rights have been expunged from Canadian democracy as a result of this 34 year unresolved legal matter.

The proper course is for a Judicial Enquiry (and not by JUSTICE CANADA) although which forum is best suited for this task is not easily attained. As matters now stand, the Prime Minister of Canada is the head of a quasi-dictatorship which is why your role in the above case is all-important. Please do not let the Canadian people down in that regard.


Yours truly, Roger Callow (signed) Plaintiff


N.B. Included is an annotated account of B.C.'s Rules of Civil Law. The key notion to appreciate in overview is reflected by former B.C. Premier Christy Clark: 'It is not a criminal matter' reinforced by former A.G Jody Wilson-Raybould's role in LAVSCAM. Only the Crown and RCMP may lay criminal charges explaining why I have to proceed on a civil level where the authorities write this matter off as a 'personal matter between litigants'. That explains why no oversight action has ever been assigned to this obvious criminal matter. 'Denial, thou are at the heart of the Canadian Justice System.'


PPS No doubt former MP Mark Carney, currently working in a top position in the British Government would be the person of choice for the Liberal MP's headed into a fall election. Tell the P.M. that Mark is 'warming up in the bull-pen'. That should get him moving. cc PMO