FROM: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ www.employeescasecanada.com

THEME: ‘The media’


1) The following article appeared in the gullible North Shore News Feb. 28/86 with its ‘yellow journalism’ before the Appeal Court quashed the arbitration ruling the arbitrator as ‘patently unreasonable’.

Laid Off Teacher Appeals Seniority threatens ‘good teacher’s job’ A ‘GOOD’ teacher in West Vancouver will be axed in order to reinstate an “incompetent” teacher if the Union wins its appeal…Board chairman Michael Smith said the Union is pitting teacher against teacher by appealing the termination of Roger Callow…”Is the Union in favour of losing a good, young teacher with the least seniority?” Smith aked. “Because if Mr. Callow stays, a better classroom teacher would have to go.”…”We keep on paying for the Board to defend its legal rights. But I think the West Vancouver community would spend five times that before we put an incompetent teacher into the classroom,” he said…Callow was the only West Vancouver teacher to be terminated for incompetence.

Response: The media failed to examine the lay-off numbers which showed an increase of 16 teaching positions which the arbitrator converted into 16 lay-offs. (The facts at arbitration showed that only the need for lay-off was quoted in the Superintendent`s letter falsely claiming School Board authority to act). By perverting this issue into the usual cliché article (brutal policeman, corrupt politician, incompetent teacher,etc.) the media bought into this scam ‘hook, line and sinker’. Smith was well aware of the conspiracy as was the previous Board chairperson, Margo Furk, the only two of the five Board personnel to approve the dismissal; a `still born`fact (due to no hearing) which I learned in 2004. For the record, I am not against firing people for incompetence, but they fired the wrong one…and know it.

2) Dog poo’s about impossible to get off your shoe no matter how much you rub. Even when it’s gone, the smell’s still there, like forever.’ Strong At The Break  Jon Land   Response: Smith & his ilk go to ‘dog poo’ school.

3) ‘Here in America newspapers also do not tell the truth, but at least you have a choice of liars. Prizes  Erich Segal

4) ‘The News of the World’ is in the business of holding others to account. But it failed when it came to itself.

5) I am done with great things and big things, great institutions and big success, and I am for... moral forces that work from individual to individual... which if you give them time, will rend the hardest monument’s of man’s pride’ W. James

6) ‘You know the definition of an editor? That’s a guy who separates the wheat from the chaff.And prints the chaff ...

The definition of an editorial writer is someone who comes down out of the hills after the battle and shoots the wounded.’

Former MacLean’s Columnist Allan Fotheringham

7) ‘Nick marvelled at the value of this gift he’d been given. How often, he wondered, did a person get to travel back into his own past to set the future straight?’

Response: Compensation for this plaintiff which is his under the law of collective bargaining (includes pension) is contingent on the legitimacy of the above ‘lay-off’. The facts would show that the School Board did not authorize the lay-off of Callow hence making a lie of the Superintendent’s letter to that effect. To hold any hearing now would illustrate how over 30 judges including the Supreme Court of Canada on three occasions would thwart any re-hearing so ordered by the court in 1986 which would expose the perfidy of a hi-jacked B.C. government (BILL 35 legislation) and a co-opted judiciary to approve a ‘sweetheart deal’. Sending the matter back to the original arbitrator was an unconscionable act considering that no new instructions were supplied although he died before a hearing could be called. Nothing has happened since despite appeals to over 30 judges. Better to sacrifice the Canadian Justice System – which is our claim to the FEDERAL COURT – than to expose a government conspiracy… and still the media remains mute on the lead judicial case in Canada’s jurisprudence.

8) (Prime Minister) Harper (recipient of the Shevenko Medal similar to an ‘Order of Canada’) said he has written Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych to express his deep concern that “the conduct of Tymoshenko’s trial does not reflect accredited normsof due process and fairness’. Response: In light of his silence on the Employee’s Case,(he has the legal books from this plaintiff outling the egregious actions of the accused judge, Anne MacKenzie which he has failed to suspend awaiting outcome. This is a major shortcoming on the P.M.s part in that the arbitrator was in limbo awaiting action on this issue…not so MacKenzie who continues in her role as Assistant Deputy Minister of the B.C. Supreme Court. Indeed argument could be made that her boss, Chief Justice Robert J. Baumann and Chief Justice of the Appeal Court, Lance G. Finch should also be included in this suspension for failing to report on an un-named Vancouver court official who one-upped MacKenzie by collecting together the duly laid legal books protesting her action and returned them to the courier). As the Ministry of the Attorney General is defending MacKenzie in court (as opposed to remaining neutral), the appeal on this level goes to the Federal Court and Parliament (2 week window) should this action fail at this level. Thus Harper should not be writing moral lessons to any other country… it’s sheer hypocrisy under the circumstances.


In summary, the future of the credibility of the institution of the media in 21st century Canada is now on the line as is the Judicial System.




FROM: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ www.employeescasecanada.com  SEE: FEDERAL COURT II


 TO: P.M. Harper & the Parliament of Canada – NOV. 20-2012 (4 pages)


QUOTES: 1) ‘What makes for trouble…is not weakness, but rationalization, denial,lying, and the hardening of our hearts in the face of truth.’ Kevin Flynn   Anglican Priest   2) ‘…For who wants his name to go down in history as a by word for cowardice and incompetence David Warren O.C. columnist   3) ‘Jonne Donne maintained that we are all a part of the whole…a community…so the bell tolls for thee. What happens when the bell doesn’t toll at all? Ken Gray O.C. columnist 

4) ‘It’s called “confirmation bias”. Once we believe something we dig in. Evidence doesn’t determine belief, belief determines evidence. And very often when we are deeply committed to a belief…not even dynamite can make us budge.’ Dan Gardner O.C. columnist 



‘Something has to be terribly, terribly wrong with the courts to use the ‘notwithstanding clause’ OPP. LEADER S.HARPER 2004

‘There is, Prime Minister Harper, there is.’ ‘The Outlawed Canadian’



1) Address to Parliament – procrastination is no longer an option in the Employee’s Case (Canada)

2) T-1386-11 - a brief background

3) Notice to Governor General – to prepare an epitaph for Canada and its democratic First World status

4) ’10 deadly crimes’- a history of abuse

5) The Justice Anne MacKenzie creed –to be quoted by all participants called to the bar

6) List of 14 large Ottawa legal firms –appeal to work pro bono in T-1386-11 for sake of 34 million Canadians


Dear Parliament,

     You cannot procrastinate any longer in this 25 year unresolved case due to a government conspiracy kept alive by the systematic injustice of over 30 capricious judges, the most recent under the Federal Court (SEE 2) below and #10 under deadly crimes. Parliament has until December 10, 2011 to publicly act if it is not to go the way of the Canadian Justice System. In that regard, immediate suspensions of B.C. Associate Chief Justice of the B.C. Supreme Court, A.W. MacKenzie, and B.C. Prothonatary, Roger Lafreniére are called for. Investigations of Chief Justices in the Vancouver Court system, Lance G. Finch and Robert J. Baumann are also required in that regard. Until such an investigation is conducted, the Vancouver court scene remains in a state  of collapse.

     Many would question my appeal to an ethically challenged Prime Minister, himself the source of judicial peccadilloes. I understand that the P.M. is unaware of half the capers run behind his back. Some would accuse his prime activities as lobbying economically for mining interests and politically for Israel’s interests. Many problems abound with this P.M.  PLACARD: P.M. MAKES BAD APPOINTMENTS including the appointment of the recent RCMP Superintendent who bluntly opined that he has no time for the ‘high muckety mucks’; a sentiment I can agree with although I am not in a position of authority. In another recent problem, for example, two senators ‘pleaded guilty’ to the infamous ‘in and out’ scandal in order to have criminal charges dropped against them. No doubt that was agreed to by the Senators but the question raised here is what happens when such action is taken without the agreement of the signatory? How does

www.employeescasecanada.com  NOV.20-2011 p.2

anyone appeal under those conditions?  The status of the Employee’s Case elevates the bar that much further as the damnable verdict of ‘not proven’ found in some western legal circles, but not Canada, is now the de facto case as

established by the unresolved kafkaesque Employee’s Case. In short, in order to save the career of one Judge in that regard, the Federal Court would sacrifice the entire Judicial System.

     Once again, I call on 14 large Ottawa legal Companies including the law faculty at the University of Ottawa to act pro bono for the plaintiff in protecting the very existence of the Justice System as well as the credibility of their own careers. Why one person should bear the brunt of that defense boggles the imagination.

     The Opposition fare no better as two out of the three parties are dominated by the Union leaders. What good, it needs be asked, is this plea from Robert Campbell, National President, Union of Taxation Employees (Letter to Editor

O.C. 11-18-11 A14) ‘…we will not give away or trade off their (members) severence pay’ when a rogue Union,the B.C. Teachers Federation continues to destroy the collective agreement negatively affecting all Union members due to precedent law?  And not a peep out of the collective mouths of Canada’s Union leaders. So much for solidarity.


MESSAGE (T-1386-11):

1) On August 31-2011, the above plaintiff laid  T-1386-11 in Federal Court alleging that Assistant Deputy Minister of the B.C. Supreme Court, Anne MacKenzie, usurped her powers by acting in such a manner that her role became identified with the Respondent Employer & Union to the exclusion of the Plaintiff’s rights and hence perverted the whole direction of the judiciary in Canada. The B.C. Attorney General responded a month later on her behalf citing jurisdictional reasons as to why the Federal Court should not act on this issue. There was no response to her action on the basis of a perceived personal bias acting outside the law as outlined in the plaintiff’s argument; a copy of which was provided to the Office of the Prime Minister.


2) On November 9-2011, Vancouver Federal Court Prothonotary, Roger Lafreniére committed a similar stunt to that of the accused, A.W. MacKenzie, by producing a bogus decision under dubious circumstances. For example, consider this gem in the decision along with my rejoinder:p.4 ‘Moirier and Boily v Rivard,1985. In Moirier, the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that so long as a judge completes his or her work in the honest belief that the matter is within his or her jurisdiction, then the judge cannot be held liable for his or her actions, even if acting out of malice.’ Response: What utter tommyrot! But then you do quote your source. Applications to the bench should include this moniker; ‘acting out of malice’ is now a valued trait.

SEE web FEDERAL COURT II for the complete Decision and my rebuttal. Suspension of Justice MacKenzie and Prothonotary Roger Freniére are to be immediately called for by Parliament by December 10-2011 in light of the failure of the B.C. Attorney General to do so (they are legally defending her, if you can believe it!). So if Parliament is not to go the way of the Canadian Justice System. Parliament cannot procrastinate any longer in this 25 year unresolved legal story in which no compensation has been paid as per collective bargaining rules. Failure to act will leave the Governor General up to December 31-2011 to write the epitaph for Canada as a First World democracy. Decades down in the 21st Century, historians will refer to the Employee’s Case as the turning point in our democratic history as a nation as to where ‘Canada lost it all’ –courts,govt.,unions,media.


ADDENDUM : To The Right Honorable Governor-General of Canada, David Johston, to respond by Dec. 31-2011

     Considering your legal background, you should have little difficulty understanding what a disaster this legal case is for the country. For example, how may the Prime Minister claim to control mayhem in the streets when there is mayhem behind the judicial bench?

     You are witnessing the decline of Canada from its first world status to that of third world as every economic failure is preceded by a moral failure. In short, Canada has been reduced to Third World status where greedy financiers can profit at our expense.

     As this plaintiff is denied access to the courts of the land to resolve a rinky dink labour matter, he is left in the unenvious position of trying to prove a negative which is an impossibility; namely, that he was never laid off from his teaching position by the West Vancouver School Board in June of 1985. As matters now stand, ‘no legal answer is a legal answer in Canada’ in defiance of the legal adage that ‘there can be no process without judgment’. The rights of all Canadians are negatively affected accordingly.

     You might prepare the ground on Parliament Hill – I suggest next to the women of the infamous ‘Person’s Case’ of 1929 – for ‘The Outlawed Canadian’; the first Canadian to be excommunicated from the Justice System making him a ‘non-person’. Indeed, as matters now stand, all employees are ‘non-persons’. It can’t get any worse than that as Canada will now be known internationally as a ‘democratic circus’. That’s a first.

     You might first begin by arranging to have the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms altered to read that this statute applies to all Canadians except former West Vancouver teacher, Roger Callow.

     If there was such a thing as a Nobel Prize for my machinations, the ‘Old Boys Club’ would surely place me at the top of the list as now, unwittingly through my actions, they control the unions, the courts, and perhaps very soon, the entire government structure.


Dismissingly  yours,  ‘The Outlawed Canadian’


www.employeescasecanada.com  NOV.20-2011 p3


Brief History : 10 deadly crimes

     While the above charge has its genesis in a 25 year unresolved  collective bargaining matter where no compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid, the charge stands apart from the original matter. This case has been before over 30 judges including 3 inconsequential trips to the Supreme Court of Canada. The following sections  summarize how the judiciary got into this precedent-setting debacle in which the entire credibility of the Justice System and government is now at stake.


1) In March of 1985, the plaintiff mailed information to the B.C. Ministry of Education alleging fraud on the part of an Administrator with regards to a Professional Report on the Teacher written on the plaintiff. As the Union represented both the interests of the Administrator and this teacher, they were not considered trustworthy.


2) The B.C. Government created BILL 35, ostensibly designed to deal with teacher lay-off and which was only used against the plaintiff before it was withdrawn in the 1990’s before the above case had been resolved. That was the first crime of the conspirators.


3) The government-appointed arbitrator ruled in favour of the School District wherein he converted 16 new hires into 16 lay-offs adding, as he did, the plaintiff as the seventeenth. In fact, only the plaintiff was laid off. That was the second crime of the conspirators. On appeal to the courts, the arbitration was quashed and the arbitrator ruled ‘patently unreasonable’. When the School District failed to return employment as recommended by the court, a new arbitration was called. It was never held leaving the plaintiff in limbo. By not retaining the plaintiff on salary as per collective bargaining rules, there was no compunction on the part of the Employer to return to arbitration. That was the third crime of the conspirators.


4) In 2002, the B.C. Labour Board Laura Parkinson B117/2002 Decision permitted the Union, the only body the court would recognize to represent the employee, to abandon the matter without repercussions  entirely altering the nature of the collective bargaining agreement. That decision was appealed under the ‘universality of union question’ which the Supreme Court of Canada refused to hear. That was the fourth crime of the conspirators.


5) A second appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada under the ‘ultimate remedy’ label by which no collective bargaining member may go without compensation was also refused to be heard. That was the fifth crime of the conspirators.


6) Subsequent cases against first, the Employer and Union for conspiracy, and secondly, against the Union for non-representation were also rejected by the court. That was the sixth crime of the conspirators.


7) In September of 2011, action S106159 was laid in B.C. Appeal Court of the Supreme Court wherein the plaintiff requested to be placed back on salary (he should never have been deprived accordingly) as an interim measure (‘delayed salary’) until a resolution to this issue was found by the court in conjunction with the only two parties they would recognize in court, the Employer and the Union. Such action would place the plaintiff in a position to deal directly with the Employer without Union obfuscation. As matters now stand, any employer may be able to avoid his financial obligations under the collective bargaining rules by hiding a dismissal behind a lay-off.


8) Justice Anne MacKenzie of the B.C. Supreme Court, for reasons best known to herself and on her own volition, without quoting pertinent laws or holding a hearing, dropped S106159 from the docket and banned the plaintiff from any access to the courts in this issue. That was the seventh crime of the conspirators.


9) CA038538 was filed to contest the above action but the legal books were later returned by an un-named court official for reasons best known to himself. That was the eighth crime of the conspirators. A $10,000 surety paid by the plaintiff to ensure the progress of CA038538 under K.C. MacKenzie of the Appeal Court of the B.C. Supreme Court appears to amount to little more than ‘judicial theft’ under these circumstances. That was the ninth crime of the conspirators.


10) On November 9-2011, Vancouver Federal Court Prothonotary, Roger Lefreniére, repeated the same stunt that Justice A.W. Mackenzie is accused of; namely, to interfere with the course of justice in a case slated to be heard in Ottawa according to Federal Court rules. On November 15, 2011, this plaintiff opened a registered letter delivered by ‘snail mail’ with his decision in T-1386-11. This plaintiff had no knowledge of this secret hearing and hence was denied a presence. Without an appeal within 10 days of November 9-2011, (very tight timelines for making an appeal) these transgressions would have been buried leaving behind the bottom line supporting the Defendants. In short, similar to MacKenzie, Lafreniére was acting as an agent for one side thus deserting his judical role of neutrality. That is the tenth crime of the conspirators…and the final one as the Canadian Justice System may be now rightfully declared to be in a state of collapse.

 In that regard, an oft quoted line from Justice Estey (St. Anne Nackawic) is germane here in reflecting the perfidy of the Justice System in this matter:  ‘What must be avoided at all costs is a fundamental deprivation of justice under the law’.


www.employeescasecanada.com  NOV.20-2011 p.4


The Justice Anne MacKenzie creed: (to be quoted verbatim by every applicant called to the bar)

This court, on its own motion and without a hearing, at Vancouver, British Columbia on Friday, October 1,2010 Orders and Declares That:

1) The Notice of Civil Claim herein is a nullity and is set aside.

2) Roger Callow shall not, except with prior leave of the Court, initiate any proceedings in any Registry of the Supreme Court pertaining to or in any way connected with the subject matter of the proceedings in the Supreme Court of British Columbia Registry File Nos…., or pertaining to or connected with the subject matter of his allegations against the Defendants in this action or arising from or related to that subject matter.

3) Any document or process filed by Roger Callow in contravention of this Order or any process inadvertently filed or received by the Registry is a nullity.

4) The defendants in this matter will not be obliged to respond to any process that is filed by Roger Callow in contravention of this Order or any document or process inadvertently filed or received by the Registry.


TO: The following Ottawa Law Companies & related legal interests for pro bono representation:


Borden Ladner Gervais LLP        f.613-230-8842             Carleton University Law              f.613-520-3690

CUPE                                           f.613-237-5508              Fraser Milgrain Casgrain LLP      f.613-783-9690

Gowling Lafleur HenderonLLP   f.613-563-9869             Heenan Blaikie LLP                      f.613-236-9632

Lang Michener LLP                    f.613-231-3191              McCarthy Tetrault LLP                f.613-563-9386

Nelligan O’Brien Payne LLP       f.613-238-2098            Ogilvy Renault LLP                       f.613-230-5459

University of Ottawa Law           f.613-562-5124