BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 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.


1)... Even in hoary old Ireland, a condemned man had to give his own name before being executed. Presumably, under similar circumstances, I would - as the targeted individual - be forced to say 'West Vancouver Teachers' Association'. Even Shakespeare let 'Shylock' have a trial!

2) 'Never Again' motto for Israel who have the good sense to meet challenges at their inception as opposed to Parliamentary procrastination in which major issues are never really resolved as we just change political parties.

3) 'The curse of the world is not decisions taken, Blake reflected, it's the decisions shelved, bought off, sidestepped.' War Dance  Tim Sebastian

4) 'To keep our confidence in our justice system, we need to take a comprehensive view of the whole picture. Public anger is a bad judge, but it is a superb watchdog when the system fails.' Ottawa Sun columnist Eric Duhaime Sept. 25-2014  p. 25


'Frivolous and Vexatious'

(5 pages) - A must read for anyone interested in the credibility of the Canadian Judiciary

1) This term should be dropped from the lexicon of the legal fraternity due to abuse as typified by the September 23 one hour hearing in Ottawa Superior Court before Justice Robert Scott. (#14-61592 of which transcript - worth its weight in gold - may be obtained by anyone from a private transcript writer  SEE www.courttranscriptontario.ca)

2) This type of abuse is endemic in the Justice System of Canada and has been exposed here for a first time in Canadian Jurisprudence although you would not know it in reading the myopic media who, in typical arm-chair fashion would support this transgression of the Old Boys Club as represented by editor Andrew Potter's Ottawa Citizen (April 28-2014 page 1 article quoting Justice C. McKinnon's ruling of April 10,2014 #13-59060 where I was the RESPONDENT. Potter refused my 'Right of Reply' which would have told a very different story of a Justice System in complete disarray. Currently, there is no rule of law in Canada due to the exigencies of the Employee's Case. Here's how that happened.

3) There would be no story here if it were not for a simple little fact which has turned out to be the Achilles heel of the Justice System; namely, that as the targeted litigant, I have no lower court decision due to the court quashing the arbitration favouring the West Vancouver School Board in the matter of my illicit lay-off as a senior teacher in June of 1985. That quashing action had, as one ramification, the effect of covering-up perjury by School Board officials. As it turned out, I was to be left in a permanent state of limbo which flies in the face of such basic judicial notions - as I pointed out to Justice Scott - as habeas corpus, due process, there can be no process without judgment ; the very bedrock of any Justice System. 'No legal answer cannot be a legal answer' in a judicial system which seeks to retain its credibility. Canada has lost that judicial credibility as I pointed out to Scott j. as this case has been before 8 separate courts across Canada and over 30 judges and yet remains unresolved. The whole point of a Justice System is to resolve issues; not prolong them or obviate them with silly jurisdictional excuses such as happened under Scott j. on September 23-2014.

4) Fast forward from 1985 to 2004 and the second failure of the Supreme Court of Canada to deal with this issue under the 'ultimate remedy' label (In the collective bargaining process, there must be remedy; that is, money must change hands. No compensation (includes pension rights has been paid in this case because there is no court finding. That's why a contract in Canada (including the entire collective bargaining process) is no longer worth the paper on which it is printed.) Canada sank to Third world status. In that hearing, the notion of a 'conspiracy of the judicial process' was claimed in the Preamble to the Supreme Court of Canada in 2004 (SEE web 'Index') which was included in the dossier before Scott j.

5) #14-61592 was launched by me asserting, for the first time, the matter of fraud on two levels; that of the original conspiracy and the subsequent cover-up by the courts due to the fact that the court in quashing the arbitration in 1986 made a fatal mistake by which I told Justice Scott, the Employer has been able to blackmail the Justice System ever since. This refers to the 'secret memo notes'  which Justice Southin returned to the Employer and Union 'because she did not use them'. (Earlier she had demanded all meeting notes from these two bodies pertaining to my lay-off). It is maintained here that if those secret memo notes were revealed (Hicks, Morley et al failed to provide those notes as requisitioned by me; a matter which Justice Scott was not prepared to enforce); it would be seen that Justice Southin was cognizant of a much larger scheme in which the government was hi-jacked (imposed BILL 35 legislation used only against this teacher before it was withdrawn before this case was completed = banana republic law); the judiciary was co-opted with a government-appointed arbitrator to condone a 'sweetheart deal' between employer and union. (The B.C. courts would only recognize the Union to represent my case even though the Union in recent years has joined forces with the Employer to thwart my legal claims in court - which is no fun for me, I can assure you. Most dismissals/lay-offs, I submit, are due to this type of unholy alliance as unions are there to protect their own assets first; oftentimes at the price of a client getting  fair treatment as happened here. In short, the cover-up in the Employee's Case has taken precedence over the original conspiracy as the Employer seeks to gain through the back door what they could not get through the front door; all done currently with the complicity of such Ottawa courts as that of Justice C. McKinnon and Justice R. Scott.

6) One reading the Decisions of Bobbsey Twin judges McKinnon and Scott could easily conclude that these pair of worthies were adjudicating a matter between an employer and an employee from another province. Nothing could be further from the truth.

7) It is submitted here that these two judges could not give a 'rat's ass' about a scumbag employer who would turn the collective bargaining process upside down to escape their fiduciary responsibilities. What they do care about is the exposure of the Justice System in that nefarious  concomitant role hence the 'frivolous and vexatious' application in order to derail any serious discussion of an issue which would challenge the very credibility of the Justice System. Keep in mind, this is not Wall Street where you follow the money trail; this is about a bureaucracy which functions on credibility alone. Canada, which includes Parliament and media as well as the courts, has shown a distinct inability to stand up to the challenges posed by the Employee's Case in court as a conjunction of all the above interests. That is how the Justice System imploded.

8) What the two judges named above have done here in a most surreptitious manner is to hide this judicial chicanery by using the Employer as a hand-maiden rewarding them richly with 'special fees' at my expense. There is not much I can do about paying this 'blood money' but I submit here that no ethical student in Canada would take up the practice of law after reviewing the record of Hicks, Morley et al in four court hearings in Ottawa courts in this matter. I submit this firm is an embarrassment to the legal profession due to their precipitate actions in this case which has been reported to various judicial oversight committees. Here's how it played out in the court of Justice Scott on September 23-2014.

9) No 'Notice of Hearing' was entered by either the Employer nor Union alleging fraud which was acceptable to me as my current battle focuses on nefarious court processes which have supplanted actions by the original conspirators.

10) When I arrived in Justice Scott's court, I was gobsmacked by the presence of Hicks, Morley, et al with a copy of a court Order from McKinnon j. dated September 15-2014 of which I had no knowledge. ( #14-61592 was laid on August 5-2014). Apparently, in what I labeled a 'Nigel Wright-Mike Duffy' arrangement between the courts and Hicks, Morley et al on the previous day - as I have no knowledge as to whom phoned whom - they were told to hustle their sorry butts down to the court with McKinnon's latest Order which Justice Scott jumped on with alacrity demanding of me; 'Look at point 4 in this Order, Mr. Callow, and tell me how you are going to address it.'

He made practically  no reference to the other 90% of the presentation I made including a detailed rejection of the McKinnon Order, other than this point which determined his 'pending' Order:

 4. THIS COURT DECLARES that the Board will not be obligated to respond to any process initiated by Callow in contravention of this Order or any document or process inadvertently filed or received by any Registry in Ontario.

11) Other than the exclusion aspect which makes a mockery of his 'may proceed only with permission of the judge'; the McKinnon Order effectively bars me from contesting this case and any other related cases in Ontario although two submissions are currently pending at the Appeal Court level for an 'extension of time'.

12) One of my major complaints against the 'MacKenzie Creed' of 2010 was this extension of control over the Registries which appears to be 'ultra vires'; another matter for the Supreme Court of Canada to handle if I can get it there. Currently there are 5 SCofC submissions being blocked by  'tyrannical King' Roger Bilodeau, Chief Registrar. While McKinnon j. conceded that the matter of my charge of systematical judicial abuse could only be handled by the Supreme Court of Canada; he was equally insistent that I was not going to use Ontario courts to get there. (The Supreme Court only recognizes appeals from the highest court.) He had no answer as to how I could make that access to the SCofC.

13) The question that needs to be raised here is how Scott j. would have ruled without this court order introduced at the last minute to whose inclusion I vehemently objected as it breached filing rules. He would, presumably, have been forced to deal with my accusations of fraud against the Justice System...and that would never do...so he ducked out; a familiar pattern over the 29 years of court dealings with this unresolved legal case.


14) I have already written the Canadian Council of Judges as to the conduct of Justice McKinnon which does not include this signed Order from September 15, about which I had no knowledge until the September 23-2014 hearing so I include it here for their further information. To date, this body has been ignoring my material. (Being a Federal Appointee to a Provincial Court explains why the complaint is directed to the above body.)

15) I now make representation to the Ontario Council of Judges as to the conduct of Justice Scott whose Order will be appealed.

16) The specific complaint for both judges relates to the 'Cullen Creed' from B.C. Supreme Court of July 23-2013 in which, on his own recognizance and without giving reasons - legal or otherwise or taking legal argument - Justice Cullen banned me from B.C. Courts in its entirety.

(So does the McKinnon Creed but there is a significant difference here in that there was a trial on this matter.) Both McKinnon and Cullen attempted to rationalize the Cullen Creed by claiming that there was a reason for this obviously ultra vires action; a lie they would perpetrate in face of the fact that the stand-alone Cullen Creed nor McKenzie Creed do not include any such rationalization. Both judges have made up that lie. I call that conspiracy.

17) The reference to the respective Council of Judges for both judges is whether the 'over-sight bodies' are going to commit to this fraud.

18) Of course the McKinnon Creed is trying - with the help of Justice Scott - to derail any such Appeal to the Appeal Court of Ontario as a means of truncating a third trip to the Supreme Court of Canada through the Ontario court system. It would seem that these lower courts do not see a Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) being strong enough to handle what amounts to charges of anarchy; largely as a consequence of the SCofC's failure to deal with this issue in 2004. To be blunt, the Ontario Appeal Court process is a mere speed bump in that sequence of appeals which is no doubt most embarrassing to them as I am not interested in seeing them send this matter around the mulberry bush again by returning it to the Ottawa courts. I have had a bellyful of Ottawa's courts under the suzerainty of Chief Justice C. Hackland. 

19) If the Justice System were other than what it is; it would rid itself of the 'frivolous and vexatious' label and permit challenges to such as the Creeds enunciated here which has created my moniker; 'The Outlawed Canadian'.

20) Should this story break on the international scene; hopefully by a Pulitzer seeking magazine or newspaper journalist, it could be most embarrassing to the Canadian media's boycott of this national story which now negatively affects Canada's 35 million population.

Should a foreign country or interest expose Canada's perfidy on this level of national hypocrisy, it would be a matter of shame without end. For example, Canada lead the battle against racial apartheid in South Africa; who will lead the battle against judicial apartheid in Canada?


P.S. Justice Scott's 3-page hand-written Order made while I was presenting my case is down-right sloppy as per his over-all performance. At one point, I called for him to recuse himself which he declined. No doubt, some would remark on his economy of time by writing out his pending Order while I was presenting my case in which he was no doubt available to make his one o'clock tee-off time. The public is not well served by having either of these two judges mentioned above sitting on the bench. While some would remark on the amazing perspicacity of these two Ontario court judges capable of cutting to the meat of an issue; some others might merely see two hectoring bullies whom, between them, have managed to smash the Canadian Justice System in its entirety. As to Parliament? Prime Minister Stephen Harper's 'Law and Order' government is defunct; the wrong people are behind bars.


OCTOBER 05-2014


in the APPEAL of #14-61592 (H.D. Sept. 23-14 SCOTT j. OTTAWA SUP. COURT)


TO: Chief Justice Hon. G.R. Strathy

Court of Appeal - Toronto

130 Queen St. West

Toronto, ON   M5H 2N5


FROM: Roger Callow



Definition: 1) The old adage 'Justice delayed is Justice denied' has a new cousin; the 'Black Hole Theory of Jurisprudence' in which the authorities do not respond to their legal mail.

2) For example, when I turned 65, I submitted my teacher retirement notice to the West Vancouver School Board. There was no response so I go without my pension rights. When I submitted my application to transfer my teacher's pension fund from B.C. to Ontario as per regulations, there was no answer from the B.C. government for two years. Then they claimed that they had lost the information so would I re-enter my application? (That way they could never be accused of procrastination.) I did and then waited another two years for the application to be processed...only in Canada you say?

3) This type of bureaucratic nonsense is not confined to this writer. For example, a claimant for compensation after 43 years in prison 'illegally' claims that he is being screwed around by the Ontario Appeal court processes...'They are just waiting for me to die', he laments. Me too. That is what far too often passes for justice in Canada.

4) Due to 'inconsistencies' with the Ontario Appeal Court at Osgoode Hall, this running record has been created to be mailed periodically to Chief Justice G.R. Strathy. While the focus is on the Appeal of #14-61592 (Ottawa Superior Court); two other cases DT-12-1872 and #13-59060 now relegated to 'extension of time' due, 'obviously' to my delay and not that of the court, appear destined for the dust bin if I miss my guess.

5) The current appeal of #14-61592 was sent directly to Chief Justice Strathy on September 30-2014 where an inclusion to him directly regarding this case alleging court fraud was made by me. Other legal references have also been made and are a part of this running commentary.




     (1) B.C. Judicial Council _____________________________________________

     (2) ON Judicial Council  _____________________________________________

     (3) Canadian Judicial Council - no response for some time now______________

     (4) Upper Canadian Law Society_______________________________________



      (1) DT-12-1872 & #13-59060 (linked for 'extension of time')  ___________________________________________________________________


      (2) #14-61592 ____________________________________________________



Other Comments _____________________________________________________







 Yours truly,  Roger Callow







BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 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.

The following article forms the basis of an Appeal of #14-61592 (H.D. Sept. 23-2014) in which two judges and the Respondent lawyer are accused of fraud.



1) maxim: In studying the laws it does not do to study the law givers. (and the judges in the Employee's Case have become those law givers with their systematical judicial abuse. No bureaucracy can withstand that charge hence all credibility (on which the Justice System solely depends) is suspended in Canada.

2) maxim: 'Lies get bigger ,not smaller over time'

3) '...and why was Finn surprised? The government lied about the most important things....' Stone Cold  David Baldacci

4) '...To keep our confidence in our justice system, we need to take a comprehensive view of the whole picture. Public anger is a bad judge, but it is a superb watchdog....' Columnist Eric Duhaime  Ottawa Sun  Sept. 24-2014




1) The heart of the current conspiracy  has been forwarded to the Judicial Council of Judges for both Canada (McKinnon j.) and Ontario (Scott j.) as well as to the Law Society of Upper Canada for a second time (C. Hofley esq. of Hicks, Morley et al for the Employer). The proper course for these review bodies would be to suspend the two judges until their actions have been examined in this legal case for conspiracy; something highly unlikely as that would attract political and media attention...and that would never do for our ultra-secretive Judiciary. Further, whitewashing is the order of the day in Canada with the only real significance of these oversight para-legal bodies is whether or not they will join the conspiracy? 

2) Typical of the media and the politicians is to define the form as it relates to substance and note that there is a great discrepancy in current day politics. Leader of the Opposition lawyer Thomas Mulcair is highly skilled in this department which explains why he would make an ideal Justice Minister. It also explains why he lacks the necessary imagination to become Prime Minister. Green Party's Elizabeth May, another lawyer, is also a disappointment as both believe silence on the Employee's Case which now negatively affects 35 million Canadians, is the best course of action.

3) As to specifics of the recent court cases before McKinnon j.(Apr. 10-2014) and Scott j.(Sept. 23-2014) of Ottawa's  Superior Court, a little speculation is required here.

4) The Employer launched #13-59060 on April 10-2014 as the Applicant in hopes of receiving a final decision showing that no compensation was owed to this employee by the employer in a 29 year matter of an illicit lay-off of a senior teacher. In that regard, they requested that all claims be discussed (in 5 minutes) to justify their position. McKinnon j. made no comment in his decision in that regard, preferring to pillory this Respondent for merely being present, one presumes. He allotted costs to the Applicant Employer as well as greatly impeded ('vexatious litigant') my progress in future courts so that I had to request 'leave to appeal' ahead of any motion before the court. That outcome and costs assigned are in the process of Appeal before the Appeal Court of Ontario at Osgoode Hall in Toronto.

5) Consequently, I was forced to lay #14-61592 on August 5-2014 ( heard on Sept. 23-2014) as a 'leave to appeal' rather than the stronger 'notice of motion'. Scott j. declined my request leading to a second Appeal to Osgoode Hall to be added to the appeal of #13-59060.

6) In labeling me a 'vexatious litigant' in order to restrict my options, a judge has to quote the history of events; in this case, right from my senior teacher lay-off in West Vancouver in June of 1985. His description of Ontario events was reasonable under the law, but his description of the Federal Court events and those in British Columbia were woefully inept. I only saw that part of his history after I received his decision hence I had no time to give a rebuttal. Conspicuous by its absence in his analysis is that I am without a judicial finding from which compensation may be paid. No compensation has been paid to date all of which shows you how biased the judge was (In appeal, I used the term 'judicial malfeasance' as opposed to the more traditional term 'judicial bias'). Nor did he note that the original arbitration was quashed with the government appointed arbitrator being ruled 'patently unreasonable'. Nor did he note that the court ordered the matter back to litigation when the Employer refused to return employment as recommended (not ordered) by the court. I was not retained on salary as per collective bargaining rules which explains why we are in a court 29 years later.

7) The focus in #14-61592 laid by me on Aug. 05-2014 was, for a first time, to allege fraud on the part of the original conspirators as well as the subsequent 29 year court cover-up which is a more serious charge of fraud.

8) The conspirators went into panic mode. While the court could care less about a scumbag Employer; nonetheless, their intertwined role with them forced them to conceal their perfidy by thwarting me at every turn; 4 Ottawa court hearings in the past 2 years being no exception.

9) How to re-direct the focus from my charge into the 'frivolous and vexatious' accusations which could conceivably be used to obviate any hearing of the more serious charge of fraud?

a) by having both Employer and Union (the latter which I now included to discuss 'all issues') not filing a 'Notice of Appearance' as they would be legally bound to rebut the charges of fraud; something that the conspirators did not want on the books as it would give me fodder for an appeal; a most unusual ploy on the part of these Respondents to be sure as the Court would be bound to accept my presentation as being valid in their absence.

b) In late August, I received a hurried notice to sign the McKinnon Order 'as to form' from Hicks, Morley et al for the Employer; a conventional housekeeping procedure much like signing for a traffic ticket. On September 05, I sent a 'modified' response without a signature which would have little effect other than to be noted on file.

c) On September 15-2014, unbeknown to me, a secret meeting was held in which Justice McKinnon re-signed his earlier Order which he deliberately - it is submitted here - made an alteration of his earlier Order by adding a sixth point to the other five and then signing the new Order.

d) There was no point in McKinnon j. signing any new Order unless there was a change.

e) Hicks, Morley et al did not see fit to inform me of this new Order although in a few memos in September, I asked them if they were planning to attend. There was no response.

f) The night before the hearing  on September 22-2014 -  I checked my e-mail; a good thing as there was a form entitled 'Notice of Appearance'  from the Employer- a highly unorthodox procedure. That presumptuous action did not bother Scott j.  on September 23 as he latched onto the new Order from McKinnon j. with alacrity ignoring, as he did, McKinnon's earlier Order of April 23-2014.

g) By looking through the big end of the telescope with a pre-determined approach; Scott j. claimed that the only matter in front of him was the matter of justifying my presence according to the 'vexatious' label. He refused to consider the 90% of my case based on fraud which would have had to be his focus if the Employer had not arrived with the New Order.

h) I likened the above machinations in court to that of Parliament's Nigel Wright-Mike Duffy affair in which, in this case, we do not know whom phoned whom first between the court and Hicks, Morley.

10) Unfortunately for Scott j., his applecart was overturned due to the fact that a detailed rebuttal by me of McKinnon's background history required to make the 'vexatious' labeling was on file in #14-61592 although Scott j. did his darndest to focus only on the September 15-2014 McKinnon signed Order at the expense of discussing the April 23-2014 Order in context. Hence I was able to make a prima facie case to which a vexatious litigant is limited.

11) While Scott j. scoffed at almost anything I said (At one point, I asked for his recusal) - even to the extent of making his handwritten Order in the 20 minutes of my presentation - I did manage to establish that the Cullen Creed (B.C. Supreme Court July 23-2013) banning me outright from B.C. courts did not include in it any explanation for his most egregious action.

12) Both judges tried to claim a motivation which was not included in the Cullen Creed hence we do not know legally speaking why this New McKinnon Order was passed. In essence, both judges gave tacit recognition to the idea that a judge may do anything he or she wishes (MacKenzie Creed and Cullen Creed) without reference to the law; a ghastly precedence. Further, In the case of McKinnon j., there was a hearing (#13-59060 on this issue) - although a rather pathetic one -; not so in the case of Cullen whom, almost anyone would concede, exceeded his authority. In trying to hide these irregularities in the fashion that they did, led to my charge of fraud against these two judges as well as the Respondent Employer

 13) The above noted fraud is to be added to the frauds of the Federal Court and B.C. Courts in what has been labeled by me as systematic judicial abuse. Only the Federal government and the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) are competent to deal at this level although it should be noted that the SCofC has been the source of the current accusations.

14) Hence, I am in a most unique position in appealing this matter to the Ontario Appeal Court where all I want is a 'by' so that I may proceed directly to the Supreme Court of Canada. That has never happened before in Canadian Jurisprudence and probably explains 'form problems' that I am recently experiencing in filing with the Appeal court in Toronto. 

15) What goes around comes around. In 1985, I made a charge of fraud against the conspirators to which the B.C. Government  imposed  BILL 35 to obviate my claim by laying-off this senior teacher for economic reasons (which was false as staff were being added in West Vancouver, B.C. and not being laid-off in June of 1985).  In 2014 in Ontario (#14-61592 H.D. Sept. 23-14), I alleged fraud against one judge whom rewrote his Order (#13-59060) in a secret hearing on Sept. 15-2014 so that a second judge could obviate the fact that the Respondent Employer and Union (which had not filed a 'notice of appearance' in #14-61592) had not addressed the topic of earlier fraud although the Employer sprung the September 15 New Order into court  on Sept. 23-2014. That in itself is a fraud by these three worthies and has been reported to the oversight legal bodies.






BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 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.

The following article forms the basis of an Appeal of #14-61592 (H.D. Sept. 23-2014) in which two judges and the Respondent lawyer are accused of fraud.


A) '...Judges are required to follow precedents and must  (my underlining) provide adequate reasons to support their decisions....'  Alan Shanoff Ottawa Sun columnist

B) '...a good speech ('judgment' RC) isn't one where we can prove that we're telling the truth - it's one where nobody else can prove we're lying....'

Yes, Minister  Rt.Hon. James Hacker M.P.

C) '...One of life's paradoxes is that people who are temperamentally ill-suited to a particular vocation actively seek it out....Solomon's Song  Bryce Courtenay

D) '...You see, John, lawyers have much less respect for the law than the rest of us. It's familiarity, you see, doing its little breeding job again....' Bad News  Donald Westlake


1) In June of 1985, senior West Vancouver teacher, Roger Callow was laid-off from his job.

2) The ensuing arbitration was quashed leaving him in limbo. No compensation including pension rights has been paid in 29 years in defiance of the collective bargaining rules.

3) In 2004, a second Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada was not heard under the terms of 'ultimate remedy' in which money under the collective bargaining rules must be paid. Canada sank to Third World status by leaving this target in a perpetual stage of limbo.

4) Two significant B.C. Judicial Orders made by judges of the B.C. Supreme Court of Canada impaired this targets access to B.C. courts; both decisions made by judges on their own recognizance, without quoting pertinent laws, without taking legal argument, and for their own unstated reasons

a) Deputy Chief Justice Justice Anne MacKenzie October 01-2010 dropped CA038538 from the Appeal Court docket in which this applicant was seeking 'interim' compensation; namely, money belonging to this target apart from judicial findings. I was effectively blocked on my course in a Third Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC). In future, I could only act 'with the permission of a judge'. (That permission was requested in CA038538 but ignored.)

b) Deputy Chief Justice Alastair Cullen July 23-2013 operating on a similar basis as the above, blocked any entry to a B.C. court forcing me into other court systems.

c) Both of these rulings are highly irregular and probably ultra vires but 4 courts in Ottawa have either ignored, or rationalized the above actions by attributing rationalizations to these actions. That, it is noted here is a fraud part of a bigger judicial fraud dating from 1985 which the SCofC  must be in abject terror of a third approach to them. Herein lies the role of the lower courts who have subverted the course of justice to that end.

5) This Applicant laid #13-58607 slated to be heard on May 15-2014 for 'interim' compensation. The Respondent Employer did not file a defence; rather they enacted their own action #13-59060 in tandem (that caper was exonerated by the Upper Canadian law society) so that they could gain advantage by being heard first on April 10-2014.

6) Hicks, Morley et al were not to be disappointed. Justice C. McKinnon ruled this Applicant to be 'frivolous and vexatious'; 'cowboyed' (second guessed) the hearing slated for May 15 by cancelling it; forbad any appeal to his decision; and, to rub salt into the wound, assigned the Employer $12,000 costs against this Respondent (my underlining). Of course, I am appealing.

7) Having #13-58607 cancelled, I was forced to lay #14-61592 'with permission of a judge to proceed'  as per McKinnon's Order held before Justice R. Scott on September 23-2014. Again, no notice of appearance was filed by the Employer (nor B.C. Union who was now included due to the Employer's request to discuss all claims.) For a first time, fraud was alleged.

8) The night before the hearing while I was checking my e-mail, there was a 'Notice of Appearance' from the Employer to which I informed Hicks, Morley the following day that they had no standing in court unless prior approval had been given by Justice Scott.

9) To my shouted court objection, Hicks,Morley leaped to the bench with a document which Justice Scott grabbed with alacrity. It turned out to be a re-signed Court Order with changes signed by Justice McKinnon on September 15-2014 without my knowledge.

10) Both judges have been referred to the Judicial Council of Judges for their baseness. Hicks, Morley was referred to the Upper Canada law society for a second time.

11) Justice Scott, whom at one point I asked to recuse himself, focused solely on the September 15 Order from McKinnon j. demanding that I limit my court argument to the 'frivolous' label ignoring, as he did in the process, the topic of fraud.

12) Fortunately, I had filed a complete rebuttal in #14-61592 to McKinnon's listing of prior events leading up to his action in this regard, as it is a requirement in law. Of course, the judicial record would include only his account as I had not seen it until his Order was brought down. It took this second case to reveal the perfidy of his account; particularly as it related to the MacKenzie and Cullen Creeds both of which he ascribed motivation which is entirely lacking in those two accounts. Three Ontario courts, including his own, failed to deal with the specifics of these two Creeds creating a most dangerous precedent; particularly as these courts sought to bury these illegal activities.

13) Of course, #14-61592 has been appealed directly through the offices of Chief Justice G.R. Strathy at Osgoode Hall to forestall being thwarted at the Registry level with (now) 3  Appeal court challenges.

14) The point is that only the SCofC is competent to deal with the matter of fraud made across eight court systems across Canada hence the Ontario courts are little more than a speed bump in that regard.

15) In bottom-line language, the Justice System is as moribund as Parliament, the body charged with its oversight.

16) Editor Andrew Potter of the Ottawa Citizen (Apr. 28 p.1) has signaled that he is on side with the conspirators...now if only pack journalism does its job....


cc PMO

SCofC Hon. Clément Gascon





BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 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.


LETTER TO THE EDITOR Attn: Kate Heartfield editor O.C.(Of course it won't get published but at least I will have my say.)



1) This revealing article appearing in the anti-employee O.C. is long overdue although it does not seek the underlying rationale for how a B.C. Teacher is pilloried for an alleged sexual assault on a student over a period of years.

2) Ramifications of this article as noted with a comparison with the Employee's Case where suited:

a) Having a spotless record is all-important for the teacher as was the case here. Considering that I was being laid-off for reasons of declining enrolment (shown to be false); my reputation remains intact as laid-off employees have recall rights as noted in BILL 35 legislation since recalled after this sole-laid case was left in limbo. Real reason? Whistleblowing. I provided the Education Ministry in Victoria with evidence of a fraud on the part of the Deputy Minister's former protégé at West Vancouver Secondary School. The answer? The imposed BILL 35.

b) By the time the student's testimony was over, it became clear 'to everyone' (weak arbitrator comment), 'that the student could not be believed and that the fired teacher must be made whole as soon as possible.' The rest of the article was written in this vein. Similarly, the O.C. published a page 1 article on April 28 giving a verbatim account of Ottawa Superior Court Justice McKinnon's Order. I have no argument on that account with the O.C. The reason that I castigate the O.C. under editor Andrew Potter is their refusal to print my 'Right of Reply'. Presuming the above mentioned teacher was maligned, the arbitrator had a nice addition which reminded me of a front page article complete with photos a number of years back about individuals falsely accused; one being my chiropractor. The second photogenic picture showed a male teacher with his wife and young daughter. I forget what the third photo was about but the message was that reputations were being sacrificed on unfair testimony from complainants; a developing theme at that time.

c) 'The times' as such as the above are a most important aspect in such trials. Up to 1990, stories on pedophiles were suppressed by the authorities. In every large secondary school every decade there would be a hushed up story of a teacher divorcing his wife and marrying an impregnated student. After 1990, the pendulum swung in the other direction. Pedophilia was driven, as far as I know, from the education system with such as the Teachers' College activity but it was still hell on earth for those charged whom were innocent.

d) I knew one homosexual teacher who was accused by a 19 year old former student of such improper relationship although it was not while the student attended school. The teacher disappeared to Japan for a couple of years and was arrested on his return to Canada with his collection of kiddie porn. A second intermediate music teacher was accused of improper conduct with a student to which a number of teachers in speaking favorably on behalf of the accused; denigrated the victim student. The teacher finally admitted his guilt but not before the student lamented: 'Why did those other teachers speak about me in the way they did?' In short, these are very messy situations boiling down to 'he said, she said' where there are no witnesses. 

e) The fairness of the School District is all important, as emphasized in this article. But what can a teacher do if it is shown that the Board entered into a conspiracy to sanction a 'sweetheart deal'? That is why the West Vancouver Trustees can ill afford a hearing on this matter in which they are culpable; a feature covered up by the Judiciary in this on-going 29 year story.

f) "There's  none of this innocent until proven guilty. It's far more, we say you're guilty, now prove you're not,' McGill Professor Jon Bradley. That is standard conspiracy behaviour; smear the target in Public e.g. Senator Mike Duffy and former Tory M.P. Helena Geurgis and force them into a defensive role. Justice Scott did exactly that on Sept. 23 (#14-61592) to me but he had to commit himself to a fraud in order to do so. That matter has been referred to the Canadian and Ontario Judicial Council of Judges as two judges were involved. In my case, West Vancouver School Trustee President Margo Furk opined in 1985: 'Why should we lay off a junior teacher who is doing his job when a senior teacher lacks 'current demonstrated ability? (cda)'  The myopic media did not check out the facts as to the evidence that I was never laid off by the Board as ascertained later by the judge; the Superintendent's letter to that effect being an apparent forgery. The term, cda, is undefined in BILL 35 nor in law in general making that BILL ultra vires although for structural reasons, it may not be applied to a teachers competence. In doublespeak language; Justice Southin claimed that the Board used the legislation for the wrong reason knowing full well that BILL 35, as the Union lawyer put it to me, was the 'Roger Callow Act'. I was the right target...and she chose to let the government and Employer get away with that stunt; a stunt reinforced by the Union which represents all my legal interests in B.C.

g) What is conspicuous by its absence is the police record which presumably was presented at arbitration; a most disturbing omission. Without that evidence, the detailed attack on the student is incomplete and does not deserve public recognition. The fact that the teacher was a sport colleague of her father and that the relationship extended from Grades 5 to 8 suggest that there must be evidence of some kind in her 'romps in the woods' or being prostituted out although some teen-agers do have vivid imaginations. Reference to the fact that a highly experienced and highly respected lawyer was hired by the Board has its shortcoming as these 'hired guns' are inclined to give their employer what they want to hear. For example, the government psychologist suggestion that terrorist Khadr was likely to re-offend was compromised by his handlers whom claim that 'he is a good kid'; an assertion which is downgraded when competing with the 'professionals'. What did this professional School District lawyer have to say in arbitration? We don't know due to poor reporting.

h)' The fear of false accusations is a major reason why fewer men are becoming teachers.' Nipissing University's Professor Gosse. True, as I had heard this rumour in my 20 year stint as a Supply Teacher in the Ottawa area which is really too bad as we need the male influence in the classroom. Would I recommend a male entering education today? No, but then even female teachers are under increasing pressure for other reasons. As one female Californian teacher put it to me recently: 'They don't know what the hell they are doing at headquarters (in L.A.)'

i) '...false accusations are on the rise' veteran substitute teacher Susan Dowell (so was I). On one occasion, I separated two girls; the one pulling down the pony-tail of the other refusing, as I ordered her to, to let go. The matter was investigated by the Board at the behest of a parent with the 3 investigators complimenting me on my honesty as my account coincided with that of the girls. (The Union felt this was a miscall by the Principal ). The letter concluding this matter from the Complaints Advisor whom had such a poor reputation in this job that he was never promoted as is usually the case for others, concluded that 'I was advised that the touching of a student in a disciplinary situation by a teacher is not supported by Board policy'. This politically correct approach could have been ameliorated by saying that it is the responsibility of the teacher to maintain discipline in the Classroom and Playground but, in that regard, the touching of a student - unless required as the 3 investigators confirmed the necessity here - may have negative repercussions on a teacher's career. The students escaped the detention that I had assigned them as both were involved in the incident: students - 1; authorities - 0.

j) At one time, students reported back to teachers with an apology after administration reprimands. A note from the administrator would ask whether the solution sufficed. No longer. The students know that no-one really cares such as the boy who lost his wallet and reported it to the Office. His mother asked, 'What did they do?' "Nothing; no-one really cared." Nor was the mother surprised at this response. We suffer from job over-load...and that is not just a problem of the schools; it applies on the home front as well as evidenced by a high divorce rate.


'The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System'  employeescasecanada.com





BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 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.

The following article forms the basis of an Appeal of #14-61592 (H.D. Sept. 23-2014) in which two judges and the Respondent lawyer are accused of fraud.



A) '..."(Legal) cases are about accountability and justice," said Mars during the closing arguments of the trial (Chicago Mafia trial in 2007), "not only for the defendants, but also justice for our system, justice for our society, and justice for the victims (Me! R.C.). Our system works. (oh, yeah?) It is the greatest system in the world. But it only works when those who should be held accountable are held accountable."  ' (My underlining R.C.-I'm all for that!) Operation Family Secrets   Frank Calabrese Jr.

B) 'If  you shut up truth and bury it under the ground, it will but grow, and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it burst through it will blow up everything in its way.'  Émile Zola



1) While the accusation of fraud  against the Canadian judiciary enunciated in #14-61592 heard in Ottawa on Sept. 23-2014 before Justice R. Scott stretches over the B.C. Judicial System, the Federal Court, and now, Ontario Courts; this account focuses on the Ontario faction.

2) Being expelled from the B.C. Courts by the 'Cullen Creed' in July of 2013 for 'reasons best known to the judge' who, on his own recognizance, without taking legal argument, without a hearing, without quoting pertinent laws; I was forced to turn outside the province under the legal terms of inherent jurisdiction and natural justice in this 29 year unresolved legal case regarding my illicit lay-off as a senior teacher in West Vancouver in June of 1985. No compensation (includes pension rights) has been paid contrary to the collective bargaining rules as I am assigned - it would seem - to a permanent state of limbo which is inconsistent with such major legal tenets as habeas corpus, due process, there can be no process without judgment. SEE web

3) Not only the government and courts (over 30 judges including 2 trips to the Supreme Court of Canada where hearings were denied) have been implicated in this fiasco which has reduced Canada to Third World status, but also the Canadian media including the CBC. When Postmedia CEO Paul Godfrey says jump; editors, columnists and reporters afraid of losing their jobs, ask 'how high'? 35 million Canadians know about the battle for Kobani in Syria while those outside the Professional teachers and judiciary personnel in Canada are kept in the dark as to a much bigger battle here at home. That battle is over credibility; the very anchor of the Judiciary, for without that, you may have laws but no justice system - a growing accusation in other quarters in our Canadian society. Apparently, there is nowhere to turn for ethical Canadians. The Employee's Case epitomizes the perfidy of our masters (the Old Boys Club).

4) As to the specifics in Ontario. In 2013, I laid #13-58607 in Ottawa Superior Court scheduled ultimately for May 15-2014 (never held due to Justice C. McKinnon 'cowboying' that session) in which I requested 'interim' compensation (back salary to 1985 as I should never have been taken off salary until a resolution had been found.) which existed apart from judicial findings and would, presumably, be added to whatever amounts were ultimately assigned by the courts in finalizing this matter. But a not-so-funny thing happened on the way to the forum.

6) Hicks, Morley et al in Ottawa for the Employer, decided in their cleverness that rather than filing a defense to #13-58607; that they would launch their own action, #13-59060, as a means of de-railing mine. Nifty, eh? What if every lawyer chose to pull that stunt? It would be legal bedlam. This was the first step in 'running a court within a court' which was sanctioned no less than by the Upper Canadian Law Society. As stated in court; I had no objection to the Employer arguments set forth in #13-59060 if they had been filed as a defense in #13-58607.

7) The details of the one hour hearing on April 10-2014 are detailed on the web and the salacious judgment of Justice Colin McKinnon was reported on page 1 of the Ottawa Citizen on April 28-2014 without accepting my 'right of rebuttal'

8) The goal of Hicks, Morley in #13-59060 was to have the court conclude that the employer did not owe any compensation by asking that all claims be discussed (in 5 minutes). McKinnon j. made no mention of this request in his judgment. It would seem that the Employer was taking advantage of what I submit is 29 years of court black-mail to gain their ends.

9) It was that employer claim to discuss 'all issues' which opened up this case as now two parties - the employer and myself as the targeted employee were - were requesting a finalization of this unresolved labour matter. In #14-61592, I included the Union (who did not file an 'appearance notice' nor appear) as the B.C. courts would only recognize their representation of my case in this 'sweetheart deal' between Employer and Union.

10) As a back-up should the discussion of 'all issues' fail (robbing me of any right to compensation would undermine any legal hearing I might attempt for future resolution); Hicks, Morley fell back on the old tried and tested 'frivolous and vexatious' charge of undermining any case I would launch. That charge does not deny court access; merely that a prima facie case must be launched by the party so affixed with this charge. In reality, this charge is similar to hanging a yellow star to your shirt and sending you into a Nazi courtroom.

11) McKinnon j. did act on this request of Hicks, Morley et al reinforcing his judgment by refusing me the right to appeal to the Appeal Court of Ontario (done in any event although this Order is being held up for 'apparent' delays forcing a separate hearing on that account) as well as cancelling out #13-58607 ('cowboying' in that he was second-guessing my arguments which were wildly off the mark due to the 'all claims' request which prompted my charge in #14-61592 (H.D. Sept. 23-2013) of fraud against the Judiciary (across Canada) and the conspirators relating to the original lay-off. Running two cases in tandem such as McKinnon j. permitted runs counter to proper legal practice. At least the Citizen article got one thing straight...'that I was referring this wacky judgment to the Canadian Council of Judges (McKinnon j. was a federal appointment although he now serves in a provincial court = more money). There has been no reply for some time now from the CCJ.

12) Now the Ontario skulduggery really begins. Neither the Union nor the Employer filed a 'Notice of Appearance' for #14-61592 (Sept. 23-2014) although I queried the Employer in e-mails on this level noting on Sept. 22-2013, that no filing had been received from them (past the due date, in any event). In checking my e-mail on the night of Sept. 22,2014, Hicks, Morley et al included a 'Notice of Hearing' for the following day. Before court, Hicks, Morley counsel wrinkled up his nose to my question: 'Did Justice Scott approve this belated filing for if not, the Employer had no standing in this court?'

13) When our case was called, HM counsel leaped to the bench with his submission while I cried out 'objection' to no avail as Justice Scott grabbed that document with alacrity. A copy was then presented to myself.

14) What' these idiots had gone and done' was arrange for Justice McKinnon to sign a second Order on September 15-2014 which differed from his first Order dated April 23 and concealed it from me until the hearing. That is the thrust of my judicial fraud accusations for the  Ontario portion of court fraud in the Appeal Court of Ontario.

15) Justice Scott wrote out a hand-written 'interim' report before the one hour hearing was over; writing while I was delivering my case which should earn him the 'justica award' for the year for multi-tasking.

16) The essence of that 'interim'Report was to say that, in the event that the Appeal Court turned down my request for a hearing (2 cases); then he was disposing of #14-62592 due to 'frivolous & vexatious' reasons. No doubt this was intended to be a great way of burying the charges of fraud.

17) While I have re-sent an Appeal of Scott j's 'interim' action to Chief Justice G. Strathy for filing (they refused on the first account as there was no ruling record from Scott); I further notified the Ontario Judicial Council of this brazen back-door attempt to influence the Appeal Court as well as divert the most serious charge of judicial fraud that I had made.

18) As my accusations of fraud against the court system stretch across three court systems in Canada, the only court competent to deal with this matter is the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) but how do I get there? I had asked Justice McKinnon. While he conceded the role of the SCofC; he was adamant that I was not going to get there through the Ontario court system. Justice Scott's actions would reinforce that position. Current Ontario Appeal Court obfuscations would also appear to support McKinnon j.'s assertion.

19) Whatever the outcome, the above quote is germane: But it (Justice System) only works when those who should be held accountable are held accountable. Granted that the author of the quote was not thinking of those sitting behind the bench which makes this case one step higher in the scale of accountability in which the 'powers to be' in Canada are unable to cope.






BY: Roger Callow ‘The Outlawed Canadian’ in an 'Outlaw Justice System' www.employeescasecanada.com (29 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.


Oct. 28-2014


(Unlikely to be published by the Ottawa Citizen due to a media boycott of the employeescasecanada.com)

REFERENCE: 'Even innocent, Ghomeshi (fired CBC radio host) can't win this legal fight' Unionized workers can't sue for wrongful dismissal, writes Howard Levitt

(Levitt & Grosman LLP, employment lawyers) Ottawa Citizen Oct. 28-2014  C9



1) So legal counsel Howard Levitt whom is neither representing the employer nor the employee would expound in the media as to the merits of this yet to be heard legal matter. As such, the Ottawa Citizen was remiss in printing this article.

2) I attribute this judge, jury, executioner approach by Levitt - other than to a gigantic ego - to be designed to curry favour with the judges and arbitrators before which he would appear on behalf of his employer clients than to any other single cause. In this endeavor, he would quote a number of cases without making reference to the central employment case which has forever changed not only collective bargaining rules in Canada but the very essence of a written contract due to systematic judicial chicanery in the unresolved 29 year employeescasecanada.com before over 8 separate courts and over 30 judges where no compensation has been paid because there is no judicial finding.

3) 'Ghomeshi surely wishes he was not part of a union'.(Levitt) The Union is there to protect the general interests of the membership; sometimes at the cost of protecting any one member. Remember, win or lose, the Union is oftentimes stuck with the legal bill for which they have limited resources. (This is the source of the 'sweetheart deal' typical of the employeescasecanada.com) Unless a client can show fraud in an arbitration; the courts are reluctant to intervene. The trick here, is that while the B.C. court quashed the original arbitration favouring the Employer, I was left in limbo without any means to expose this fraud.

4) Normally, a Section 12 application to a B.C. Labour Board would have permitted this fraud outlined above to be exposed. The B.C. Labour Board refused a number of times to hold any such hearing declaring that the Union's submission did not show 'that they had done anything wrong' which raises the question as to whether or not they did anything right? This is a little like proving a negative but the point is that when, many years later at age 65, I tendered my teacher resignation with the West Vancouver School Board in order to receive my pension rights. As there was no response from the Employer - no doubt due to the fact that I did not have a judicial finding - my state of limbo was enhanced to a degree, I submit, which was never the intention of the collective bargaining rules; particularly as the Union deserted the case which the courts, at one time, had ordered back to arbitration when the Employer failed to return employment as recommended by the judge.

In short, what the Employer could not gain through the front door of the fraudulent arbitration; they were able to gain through the back door by corrupting the judiciary to such an extent and degree, that 'rule of law' under the Harper government is nothing more than a facade unworthy of any democratic country.

5) A most important omission in the above article is whether the Union granted the power to the client to proceed at his own cost which is customary although in my case, the Union refused to grant legal status. The first appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada (SCofC) at the turn of the century rejected by then Chief Justice A. Lamers (d.), including incumbent Chief Justice B. McLachlin on the panel refused to hear this all-important national question of the 'inherent jurisdiction of Unions' . Granted that the Union must represent all members when it comes to salary negotiation; but what about the client subjected to a sweetheart deal such as I was? (Most dismissals are done, I submit, in pre-arrangement between the two parties apart from the knowledge of the targeted victim.)

6) The above failure of the SCofC to hear the first appeal noted above was the pre-cursor to the second SCofC Appeal in 2004 under the 'ultimate remedy' terms of the collective agreement in which money must change hands. It is the law that a price tag must be placed on a job; that is, it would appear to be the case until now as employers may avoid all pecuniary obligations by hiding a dismissal behind a lay-off. Why the CBC employer didn't follow that routine is uncertain although keep in mind that the Employee's Case does not have registered findings; merely highly suspicious judicial rulings designed to keep this case in limbo. That's not law. It's anarchy. Surely, the CBC employer has an offer on the table as a means of obviating the client's case. The Employer in the Employee's Case ran that routine for close to 15 years as a means of escaping judgment. In the words of my legal Counsel, I would have been better off if there had been no financial offer on the table as then the courts could intervene; union or no union.

7) As a matter of lay-off (complete with recall rights) as opposed to dismissal for cause, a client must be available for re-employment which is why, at age 73, I must adhere to that law in advancing anything else. Of course, that proposition places me in a preposterous position explaining the Montreal Gazette's front-page story mimicking the Ottawa Citizen Apr. 28 p.1 with this caption: Teacher wants job back after 29 years.

8) While I am sure labour law has undergone changes which Levitt is familiar with and I am not, I still suggest his advice on court procedures relating to Unions leaves much to be desired and should be construed as written for the benefit of his employer clients. The article on C4 is more central to the issue pointing out how extra-curricular actions can be used against an employee; particularly in the teaching profession. (My 'crime' was whistleblowing'. Exposing my story to the public would have had devastating implications to the teaching profession as it alleged fraud on the part of an administrator as it related to altering his professional Report on this teacher from a positive to a negative. I caught him.)

9) No doubt the CBC is in a tight position on this one but without stated reasons, they have no legal defense. Has the Union dispensed with any rights they may have in order that the client may continue with his issue? We are not told. Surely, Ghomeshi's 'confession' is not included in his own factum. SEE 'Red Neck Media' on my web site as to how I handled the press quite apart from the Union's actions. What seems to upset Levitt is that Ghomeshi's law firm was unable to muzzle its client. Senator Mike Duffy's case comes to mind when one remains silent in the face of a case being tried in the media. I couldn't stop the media juggernaut but I was able to slow it down in the 1980's.

10) The key to settlement is mainly based on appropriate compensation; herein lies the function of the court if the two opposing parties cannot reach a settlement. That is why the Canadian Justice System has failed in its entirety in the Employee's Case and why the next Prime Minister will have to extricate the Justice System from the devastating indictment of a perfidious Judicial operation leveled by the Employee's Case; if that is, indeed, possible.

11) It would seem that Levitt would put paid to former Prime Minister P.E. Trudeau's statement that 'the nation has no business in the bedrooms of its citizens', at least as far as employee's are concerned. As to employers? Perhaps they are a special breed in the annals of Levitt and I can hardly wait until the wrongdoers in the administrative quarters are brought to account...just like employees.


The Outlawed Canadian in an outlaw Justice System


CBC's Ghomeshi firing vs employee's case

employeescasecanada.com RECENT & OCTOBER-2014

OCTOBER 28-2014 My take on the firing of the popular CBC radio host, apparently for sexual peccadilloes. To be sure, the CBC and the Union were hoping for a quiet settlement which Ghomeshi underscored with his legal action. Now it remains to see if Union membership has any meaning i.e. may an employee be dismissed without a reason? If so, no-one will hold Union membership. Just think...if this dismissal without a reason held sway in 1985, the Employer would not have had to pervert the government by arranging the passing of the imposed BILL35 (replicated in 2013 in Ontario with BILL 115)...what efficiency! But then, no reason has ever been given by the Canadian Judiciary as to why, after close to 30 years, there is no resolution of the Employee's Case...way to go, democratic Canada! Next up? A 'parting of the ways' for School Boards eliminating senior teachers (salary twice that of beginning teachers)...and still the professional teachers sit around twiddling their thumbs.... 

OCTOBER 30-2014 The aim of the CBC in the Ghomeshi case appears clear; they would use the media to find justification for a second firing; this time with reasons given. That is fraud but try and find a carefully selected judge to rule accordingly. Currently the oversight legal organizations are stalling in investigating why Justice McKinnon wrote a second rationalization on September 15-2014 in the Employee's case of his April 22-2014 decision; the former kept a secret from me until the Employer's surprise appearance in a hearing on (other) fraud alleged in the September 23 hearing before Justice Scott (a second Federal Court appointee to ON Superior Court). Scott j. would only refer to that second Order. That's fraud. ...so fraud heaped on fraud = the Canadian Justice System. The message to Union employees seems clear; lay your own charge as a means of pressuring the Union to support you. I did it when I changed lawyers after the arbitration favouring the Employer which the Union felt reluctantly obliged to support. The court quashed that arbitration in 1986 ruling, as they did, the arbitrator to be 'patently unreasonable'. Ghomeshi and any other Union employee so afflicted should be so lucky. Keep in mind, Ghomeshi, by his own admission, is not a very nice guy; I am in contrast, in that I had nothing to do with lay-off numbers which the West Vancouver School District fabricated. Going up against the big guys, knowing first hand how the Canadian Judiciary functions is a Herculean task at the best of times for any individual. 'It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong'. former Prime Minister P.E. Trudeau