BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ www.employeescasecanada.com(29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the clusterfuck case’. Canada’s Watergate- Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. Canadians awoke in the New Year to a Justice System in tatters and without leaders to rectify this national debacle negatively affecting 35 million Canadians. The failure of Prime Minister Harper to invoke the 'notwithstanding clause' or similar ('peace, order and good government' clause) has shown the inability of the legislative arm of Parliament to control the executive arm of the Judiciary. In brief the dual debacle of the credibility of the courts is matched by the debacle of government responsibility leaving 35 million Canadians in the lurch.



1) 'I love to hunt for lawyers, they think they're so clever at hiding things, but it's so easy to flush them out of the undergrowth. Almost too easy.' Doctored Evidence  Donna Leon

2)" 'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?' said the Roman poet Juvenal. Who will guard the guardians? The Supreme Court's decision helps to clarify that it cannot be the police themselves."

3) 'First of all, the people who are asked to obey authority have to feel like they have a voice - that if they speak up, they will be heard.' David & Goliath  Malcolm Gladwell

4) 'We believe victims deserve more respect, more inclusion and a stronger voice in the justice system.'  Justice Minister Peter MacKay

5) 'The cover-up is always worse than the crime.' The Affair  Lee Child

6) 'The Day we see the truth and cease to speak it is the day we begin to die. Martin Luther King

7) 'Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere' Ibid

8)  Dark Age Ahead  Jane Jacobs These quotations say it all.

    (a) Like children, professionals need to be taught right and wrong, and why.

    (b) There is no quicker way for a profession to lose public respect than to cover-up, institutionally, for members who have done         errant wrong.

    (c) A culture is unsalvageable if stabilizing forces themselves become ruined and irrelevant.

    (d) But at least he spoke up with fresh truths drawn from the real world, and that is a beginning. If that is lost, all is lost.



REPLY 25A to #13-59060 Hearing Date APRIL 10-2014 Ottawa Superior Court


1) As of this date, I have not received from the Employer, any factum detailing their case in the laying of the above action which appears to be designed to supplant #13-58607 laid earlier by me (Hearing Date MARCH 13-2014); the only change being to make the Employer the 'Moving Party'.

2) With this REPLY,  I am requesting that I be made the 'moving party' as I am asking the court to quash this apparently redundant #13-59060 and to award $10,000 in maintenance fees to me. (After reviewing the Employer's response to #13-58607 of January 23-2014, that amount has been increased to $30,000 for undermining the course of justice.)

3) Recently, the Federal Court failed to register the above action focused on the 'Cullen Creed' (2013)due to its similarity to the earlier 'MacKenzie Creed'(2010) from the same B.C. Supreme Court of B.C. denying me access to that court to finalize an unresolved legal action. No correlation between the two was made by the B.C. Supreme Court.

4) While the effect on this writer was the same; there is a world of difference between the two Creeds; the one I rejected (2010) and the one I accept (2013).

5) Regrettably, Justice Minister Peter Mackay did not dismiss Federal Court Justice Madame Gleason from her post in giving a highly specious ruling in the matter of hearing the Cullen Creed noted above which differs significantly.

6) The Supreme Court of Canada Registrar, Roger Bilodeau, recently paralleled Gleason's action by refusing to permit the 3 pre-trial judges of the SCofC to decide on the MacKenzie Creed in this matter of national importance. It is the equivalent of 'Christie closing down two lanes of the George Washington bridge to make a political statement'. In short, he usurped the course of justice in Canada. His letter (SEE January 01-2014) records the terms of the Justice Act in such fashion that one would think that the telephone numbers in the phone book are being enumerated. His conclusion obviating this case set apart from those conditions is tantamount to saying that the number I called is 'not in service'. To be sure, a preposterous letter but whom is there to call him to account?

7) As there is no appeal of the Registry's actions, first Justice Minister MacKay, and then Prime Minister Harper were requested to take action. There was no response.

8) At this point, it would seem that Hicks Morley for the Employer would, through some unexplained legerdemain, seek to parallel the above actions as a means of permitting the Employer to escape their fiduciary obligations as well as block this writer from his rightful pension claims.

9) It is a judicial disaster without equal as the court and now, Parliament, have acted in concert to deny a Canadian citizen from his rightful claims in a court of law. 35 million Canadians are negatively affected by this apparent government conspiracy which has reduced Canada to Third World status.



10) Looked at from the point of the conspirators, SCofC's non-action by Registrar Roger Bilodeau is the logical progression from a legal system which is never going to admit that they are wrong; even if their action leads to the demise of democratic Canada.

11) No doubt the conspirators believed that even permitting the judges to reject my appeal would be seen as giving tacit approval to any judge to act outside the law (as I submit the MacKenzie Creed did) to undermine the course of justice.

12) But is Bilodeau's response any better? Quoting the Rules of the Court as he has done and then concluding - without drawing any link - that I could not proceed is tantamount to usurping the role of judges in Canada thus making them redundant.

13) PLACARD: KING HARPER IS DEAD/ALL HAIL SCofC REGISTRAR KING BILODEAU says it all for the Prime Minister has abrogated Parliament's function to that of the Judicial System. In brief, both responsibility and credibility respectively have been breached.

14) Presuming the 3 judges would permit a hearing of this case of national importance (i.e. the sanctity of a written contract), what conclusion could the court find that would lead to a just decision for this writer without the population asking why it took 29 years of continuous litigation  to reach such an answer? That is the source for the claim of systematic judicial abuse. No institution can survive that charge and retain its credibility.

15) Far easier, believe the conspirators, to continue stonewalling. Besides, isn't the incumbent Prime Minister the prize stonewaller of all time? Learn by example?

16) A parallel may be drawn here with police domestic complaints with its attendant 'race to the phone' (first call in wins the race). Here, the race is to the Office of the Chief Justice (8 courts in this case) wherein a 'compliant' judge is appointed to a 'pre-determined' answer. In short, the judge deserts his judicial role to act as a proponent for one side.

17) The level of abuse experienced by this writer with 8 court systems would suggest that an entire river is required to clean this Augean stable.

18) So where is one to turn when the forces for law and government have failed the people? The media should be the logical answer but here it is not.

19) As a general theme, the anti-employee Canadian media will support the institution against the individual (SEE web RED NECK MEDIA). Further, editors control what a writer is to do and, perhaps more importantly what not to do which explains the media boycott on this story. (I have had news reporters apologize to me privately on this level.)

20) To be sure, if the media had attended this high profile initial arbitration under the neophyte BILL 35 in 1985, the Employer would never have acted as they did. That arbitration saw the government-appointed arbitrator (later ruled patently unreasonable by the courts) convert 16 new hires into 16 lay-offs adding myself as the necessary 17th. Media presence, in other words, was and still is, now all-important for individuals involved in high stakes issues against institutions. The media is still MIA and it remains to be seen as to whether they will appear in court on April 10-2014.(or March 13-2014)

21) Appeals across Canada have gone out to professional teachers to don this Placard Sign:  WE SUPPORT THE OUTLAWED CANADIAN and e-mail the photo to me (non-teachers are now encouraged to join this campaign.) Without that public support, there is no reason for the courts to change their ways unless, of course, I stumble on an ethical judge.

22) While the Cullen Creed is even more preposterous than the MacKenzie Creed; nonetheless, it is an absolute definition of abandonment of this issue by the courts which I am prepared to accept in order that back salary (I should never have been let off salary until this matter was resolved) may now be paid... 29 years worth which exists apart from judicial findings.

23) Thus the entire focus of the above hearings is for the Employer to respond to this question: 'Is the Employer bound  to honour the contract for back salary; if so, how and when  should  this be paid?'

24) Hicks, Morley were permitted to duck out of this question in earlier hearings in Ontario. The added question to the Cullen Creed is how this party may proceed in this unresolved case where the courts would only recognize the Employer and Union, both of which have failed to resolve this issue as once ordered by the court?

25) By refusing to elevate this matter to a 'Special Case' in which the 3-judge Appeal Court would hear this issue, Hicks, Morley et al is, one and at the same time, able to double their billable time without risking having to respond to central questions which the court refuses to address to them. In brief, the Ottawa Courts under Chief Justice Charles Hackland, duck out with a 'King Bilodeau' type response.

25) No employee will hold Union membership nor contribute to a Company pension plan in Canada under these circumstances. In brief, the whole future of Canada is at stake as mirrored in this upcoming hearing on April 10,2014. (and March 13-2014)

26) Placed in the negative, even if the campaign for support (WE SUPPORT THE OUTLAWED CANADIAN)is not successful before the court, at least professional teachers in Canada will be shown not to have traded in the 'yellow star on their shirt' for a 'collective yellow streak down their backsides'. All Canadian employees will be the worse if there is no public acknowledgment of the Employee's Case on April 10, 2014. 'Prostitution is not the oldest profession. It is apathy Ottawa Sun columnist Warren Kinsella


SEE web REPLY25A-April 10-2014 for  specific applicable legal arguments


cc 'King Bilodeau' & his acolyte, Stephen Harper/Premier Wynne/SCofC Judge Wagner

     (honorifics dropped as our leaders no longer deserve them.)





BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ www.employeescasecanada.com(29 year unresolved legal case) now known judicially as ‘the cluster-fuck case’. Canada’s Watergate- Pulitzer Prize winning author being sought. Canadians awoke in the New Year to a Justice System in tatters and without leaders to rectify this national debacle negatively affecting 35 million Canadians. The failure of Prime Minister Harper to invoke the 'notwithstanding clause' or similar ('peace, order and good government' clause) has shown the inability of the legislative arm of Parliament to control the executive arm of the Judiciary. In brief, the dual debacle of the credibility of the courts is matched by the debacle of government irresponsibility leaving 35 million Canadians in the lurch. Current series is now addressed to the Prime Minister's  Office



1) 'You can't have a pact with God and with the Devil at the same time.' The Skating Rink  Robert Bolaño

2) 'And, truthfully and ethically, the judge did not have to know their strategies outside the courtroom.'     The Litigators  John Grisham

3) 'You know why the world is run by clerks? It's because our best people flame out across the sky and never leave anything behind but a good light show.' Julie Blon's Bounce James Lee Burke

4) 'Life is complications, Arlen. The higher you climb the more they pile up, until you have one cluster-fuck after another. Blood Trust Eric Van Lustbader

5) 'It's dangerous to be right when the government is wrong'  former P.M. Pierre Trudeau

6) 'If you are going through Hell, keep right on going.'  Winston Churchill





1) To the public and novelist, John Grisham who spins a good yarn, it is a question of law. To legal counsel, it is a question of 'who is the judge'? As to this writer's 29 year experience with the Canadian courts in an unresolved legal case due to systematic judicial abuse? PLACARD: STAY OUT OF A CANADIAN COURTROOM UNLESS YOU FIRST BUY THE JUDGE.

2) Was Geurgis slandered during the conduct of her action against members of the PMO Office? My reading of press releases is in the affirmative but challenging a number of high profile figures in the Office of the PMO and Tory Party was doomed to failure as the courts traditionally are accustomed to focusing on scapegoating individuals. While no doubt her legal counsel was advising her to remain quiet before the media during the ongoing trial, she was being skinned alive in public by salacious government leaks which were highly prejudicial to her public image of which the court was only too aware.

3) I experienced much the same kind of media castration (SEE web: RED NECK MEDIA) when such as West Vancouver School Board Chairperson, Margo Furk, was quoted in the media as saying: 'Why should we lay-off a junior teacher when there is a senior teacher not doing his job?'  The fact that there was no need to lay-off any teacher escaped the anti-employee media (the later condemned government-appointed arbitrator had converted 16 new teaching positions into 16 lay-offs adding my own name as the 17th knowing full well that I was the only teacher lay-off in June of 1985.) Indeed, it was media failure to attend this high profile precedent-setting case which set the conspiracy in motion for without their complicity, the fixed arbitration would never have got off the ground. That national media boycott extends to the present day which explains the complete failure of Canadian democracy.

4) As a generalization, newspaper accounts are at best an apology for court cases based on an 'honest issue going South' and have no public conception of the perfidy of the courts acting in conjunction with judiciary interests to stifle honest argument anathema to their own Order. It's a huge gaping hole.

5) While I cannot get media exposure, Helena Geurgia does. The media see her as a 'loser' and one to be exploited as a means of embarrassing the government with the target of selling papers. Interestingly, my case is a 'winner' which does not suit the paraparazzi  mentality of the media.

6) From the legal standpoint, I am unable to comment on the legalities of the Geurgis case due to a paucity of information. As a 'political trial'; however, I can speak legions on both our cases which I consider as political trials running counter to the laws of the land.

7) Based on newspaper accounts, I do not see Geurgis as having a case. The P.M. may drop anyone from caucus without explanation. Depriving her of Party membership, while apparently done without general Party discussion and therefore not ethical, does not translate into legal malfeasance. In the ensuing election, she ran as an Independent and lost to the Tory candidate. In short, she was 'voted off the island' by the public.

8) Hence legally pursuing various individuals for slander as a by-product comes as a far second. Ottawa Chief Justice Charles Hackland refused to let her proceed against all except for one former colleague, M.P. Cheryl Gallant, apparently on the innuendo that '...if only the public were to be made aware of what other charges are being considered....'

9) Generally, Gallant is on safe ground with this type of allegation as she can always find someone to testify (honestly or otherwise) that, indeed yes, other considerations were contemplated even if they were not pursued. Alternatively, she can withdraw her comments and apologize on the grounds that other alternatives did not materialize and therefore her comments at worse were 'premature'. Such an apology would excuse her in the eyes of the court which is all Geurgis is concerned with here. Of course the damage has already been done (see Senator Mike Duffy case) and Geurgis is already behind the public 8-ball in this case as the court is only too cognizant.

10) Enter Chief Justice Charles Hackland. It is never a good thing to have a Chief Justice assigned to a political trial if you are 'the little guy'.

11) For example, Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) Chief Justice Antonio Lamers (d) and his successor, Beverley McLachlin, formed the 3 judge panel which votes for continuance or rejection of an issue before the court. 85% of civil issues are rejected with no reason given leaving the plaintiff with a lower court decision. (Because there is no lower court decision in the unique conditions of the Employee's Case, this plaintiff was left in a permanent state of limbo which is how Canada sank to Third World status. In brief, the law was perverted by the judges and they were caught in the act of perverting it.)

12) The SCofC compounded their felony of, in effect, sanctioning the 'sweetheart deal' between the Employer and Union at the expense of the client employee, by failing to hear this case under a second appeal; this time under the 'ultimate remedy' label under which no collective bargaining client may go without compensation (which in this case also includes pension rights). No employee will hold formal connection to a Union nor contribute to a work pension under these circumstances. In brief, the SCofC undermined the basic concept of the validity of a written contract to such an extent and degree that they made the Canadian Justice System redundant. There is no longer any recourse for Canadians seeking remedy under the law. That is quite an indictment which goes unpublished in the disgraced media.

13) Top tier judges will not take political cases. Indeed, it might be said that such cases are kept from them leaving it to Chief Justices and Deputy Chief Justices (both the 'MacKenzie Creed' and 'Cullen Creed' are by Deputies) or to those judges who have already expended their reputations and are assigned the appointments through the Office of the Chief Justice. Hence my war is really with the Chief Justices in six different court systems. (SEE web 'JUDGING JUDGES' for list)

14) Ottawa Chief Justice Charles Hackland is no exception to the point above as a Superior Court Judge plus 3-judge Divisional Court Appeal now directed to the SCofC (where it is currently being hamstrung by the SCofC Registrar, Roger Bilodeau), leave the impression that they were merely rubber-stamping a pre-written decision in the Employee's Case.

15) A further matter applies to the Geurgis Case which implies judicial cupidity...'the dog didn't bark'. Geurgis is unable to pay $100,000 plus fees in trial costs and still wishes to continue against M.P. Cheryl Gallant; the only one against which Hackland would permit to proceed. Under those conditions, an ethical judge would first force her to post a surety; something not being done by Hackland. Why not?

16) For example, my legal fees have always been paid in a timely manner but the Employer and Union at one point joined hands and demanded that a $10,000 surety be posted before a hearing against the 'MacKenzie Creed' could be heard in B.C. Appeal Court in 2011. Appeal Court Judge, K.C. MacKenzie (no relation to A. MacKenzie although one has to wonder what they put in the porridge of the MacKenzie clan) did not notify me of his decision and by the time the Employer did, the very brief time limit to pay had expired. Unfortunately for the conspirators, I learned of the decision from other quarters and had already paid the fee within the allotted time limit. That Appeal was never heard explaining one of my additional trips to the SCofC who ducked another bullet in a continuing line of bullets on other points. This case also ended up in Federal Court and Ontario (as noted above) where the authorities continue to mangle this matter at great cost to the proper functioning of justice in Canada. This surety money is frozen because I have no status to retrieve it although the Employer and Union in B.C. have already dipped into this 'honeypot' in a hearing where I had no standing. Again, this is 'standard procedure' considering the failure of the SCofC to address this central issue of recognition/access for any justice system. In short, the Employer and Union (which has sole control over my interests) were seen to be 'stealing' these funds with the compliance of the court.  The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is little more than a bad joke under these circumstances.

17) Detailing the account above is necessary in order to explain the Geurgis case. In contrast to the Employee's Case, Hackland  wants Geurgis to proceed against Gallant, possibly to deflect attention from court actions snowballing her. Much the same thing happened to senior West Vancouver teacher, Ken Raison (SEE web; ORIGINS) when he lost his teaching career due to a so-called  'incompetence charge' (3 sequential negative Teaching Reports over 2 years) in a highly publicized arbitration in 1978. 'What did you expect?' opined a Union leader to me, 'The vote went 2-1 with the Union and Employer each selecting an arbitrator with the government appointing a retired Superintendent. To cut the story short, Raison sued the new principle (parallel to Gallant) for libel and won although he was still out of his career.

18) My interpretation for Hackland's strange continuance in the Geurgis Case:

a) judges don't like to see lawyers go without their fees hence a win for Geurgis would help offset this difficulty.

b) In order to deflect negative opinion from the P.M. and the processes of the court in the public eye, a win for Geurgis would see Gallant 'falling on her sword' for the sake of the Party (not to mention the court).

19) Draining the swamp which I did and Geurgis is seeking to do is fraught with peril as exposed alligators wondering what happened to their water make for vicious enemies.

20) In summary, using the Canadian Justice System in cases labeled 'political' is no longer in any one's interest as democratic Canada has collapsed - both courts and government.




21) The court collapse was seen in 2004 when the SCofC failed to hear the Employee's Case under the rule of 'ultimate remedy'. In short, a Canadian written contract is 'not worth the paper on which it is printed' let alone does it have any meaning in the collective bargaining process. That's when Canada was reduced to Third World status.

22) Recently, SCofC Registrar Roger Bilodeau rejected the customary 3-judge panel (after earlier repeated appeals on my part). In brief, he usurped his role making judges redundant. That was when the Justice System was smashed beyond all recall and led to appeals first to Parliament (Justice Minister Peter MacKay/ Opposition Leaders Trudeau & Mulcair) and when that failed, directly to Prime Minister Harper. Failure on the P.M.'s part explains how we are no better than Nazi Germany where democracy was used to destroy democracy.

23) It should be noted that Ontario (Premier Wynne/Hudak/Howarth) and B.C. (Premier Christie Clark) are also a part of this Great Canadian Debacle; a debacle without equal in search of an international pulitzer prize winning writer.

24) Of interest here is why the SCofC would abandon judicial principle and hide behind 'clerk' Bilodeau in what appears to be a 'lesser of two evils' approach (which it isn't).

     a) Any SCofC challenge - and there have been five of them since 2004 - would bring into sharp relief the failure of the SCofC earlier in leaving this litigant in limbo so that no compensation flows including work pension rights. e.g. Employer: 'We are not dismissing you thereby incurring fiduciary obligations; rather, we are laying you off and if you do not settle for $1, you will not collect your pension.' Work pensions in Canada are defunct under those conditions.

     b) The 3-judge SCofC court, even in dismissing the above appeal, would be seen as giving tacit approval to judges going completely off the farm in order to cover-up judicial excesses...and that would never do.

     c) Hence the only alternative to being in this tight judicial spot is for 'clerk' Bilodeau to bury the 'MacKenzie Creed'  behind a Registrar's Order to which there is no appeal. The failure of Justice Minister Peter MacKay, Opposition Leaders Mulcair and Trudeau complete Parliament's failure to deal with the legal scam of the century. P.M. Harper, in turn, has shown his weakness by failing to take remedial action  under the constitution.

25) The above account is an inkling of what Geurgis can expect should she pursue her 'legalities'.

26) The recent charge of fraud against Senator Brazeau is problematic for the government for a number of reasons although with P.M. Harper being a public cheering section unto himself, the trial can be expected to be a political case; no doubt held before a Chief Justice.