C-36 and the deranged Plaintiff Terri Bedford

[daydreamer41]

I was reading the Bill C-36 Media Watchlist and saw the last post, an article which reverdy posted.

https://merb.cc/vbulletin/showthread.php?118900-Bill-C-36-Media-Watchlist-you-can-help!/page2

Here's part of the article I that caught my attention:

Bedford won’t discuss what kind of proof she has about politicians.

“The less I say the more effective I’ll be right now,” she says.

She says she will carefully consider the implications of any release, but is driven by a desire to stop the government from passing a law that she believes will jeopardize the lives of sex workers.

Hepatitis C is ravaging her liver. She is trying to arrange for an expensive drug treatment but has not yet managed it.

“If I don’t get treated I may not make it through the winter,” she says. “So I’m really hoping that I do something before I leave this earth that is well worth fighting for, to be remembered for.”


After reading this part of the article, I learned something about the plaintiff that I did not know before. She is retired and she is ill.

In the US, US law has a concept in which you cannot be a plaintiff if you are not affected or you not impacted negatively by the defendant's action or in this case by the law.

Bedford is retired. How is she affected?

So I am thinking this woman is extremely histrionic. She has taken an industry, the escort industry, which is operating fairly well and safely in Canada, and its about to be turned upside down because of her court challenge, which does not affect her (she's retired).

She threatens elected government officials with disclosure. She misbehaves while testifying before them. Yet, the current law, which was ruled unconstitutional by Canada's Supreme Court, really was not threatening her. She operated her business when she was working without arrest.

Now, the Conservative party is in power and they are going to pass a law which will make it difficult for the customers of providers and agency owners.

She strikes me as a nut. Why did she go down this road?

Also, how come she cannot get medicine for Hepatitis C? I thought that the government of Canada negotiates with pharmaceutical companies for better prices? There are quite a few people with Hep C.

Well, do you think she has gone where she shouldn't have? I am interested in others' point of view.

 

[Siocnarf]

In the US, US law has a concept in which you cannot be a plaintiff if you are not affected or you not impacted negatively by the defendant's action or in this case by the law.

Bedford is retired. How is she affected?

They did the constitutional challenge under the civil rules of proceeding, not the criminal rules. My understanding is that it does not have to be based on an actual charge.

Anyway, what she is threatening now is not a legal action.

 

[daydreamer41]

They did the constitutional challenge under the civil rules of proceeding, not the criminal rules. My understanding is that it does not have to be based on an actual charge.

Anyway, what she is threatening now is not a legal action.

I was referring to civil action, not criminal. Then the US civil court laws are different than Canada's civil court laws

 

[BookerL]

Hi daydreamer41

This is actually a excellent question

So I am thinking this woman is extremely histrionic. She has taken an industry, the escort industry, which is operating fairly well and safely in Canada, and its about to be turned upside down because of her court challenge, which does not affect her (she's retired).

What you are saying is true the escort industry was operating fairly well other the previous a few bust here and there but clients of outcalls where rarely bothered .
Its is not only her the problem ,I have been involve as a plaintiff in many civil cases and charged under many criminal or penal offenses.
Luckily for me I have studied law .
All lawyers dreams someday of having a really a high profile case that will bring him notoriety and prestige what better then to challenge the constitutionality of articles of the criminal code in a civil hearing ,it cannot bring any jail time because no one is actually charged .
Instant Notoriety come to the plaintiff and lawyers .Lets say I was offered to challenge the constitutionality of a law once I have declined to be the plaintiff
My personal highest case went to the Quebec Court of appeal ,,I had followed the advice of my lawyer .
It wasn't really a good idea but it was done anyhow ,that part had a negative decision from the court of appeal but in there decision they also wrote to go back to the first instance court ,witch I did and received a positive decision ,by the way I did change lawyer .
I am presently appealing a decision that was made by a administrative court .
You have to choose your battles and also look at the impact the challenge will have after the decision is made .
In the case of Bedford it is obvious that no one thought of the negative impact that the strickening of certain part of the prostitution law would have, it is a major fiasco ,not only for the clients and all sex workers but also for all Canadian tax payers that are paying to fix something that was working as you mentioned fairly well .Sad situation

She threatens elected government officials with disclosure. She misbehaves while testifying before them. Yet, the current law, which was ruled unconstitutional by Canada's Supreme Court, really was not threatening her. She operated her business when she was working without arrest.

Some things are better left unchanged but now it is way to late ,the damage is irreversible,millions and millions of $$$$ already have been spent and many more will be spent for what? so a trio of unknown people with their lawyer get fame ?????? Shame



Cheers



Booker

 

[Siocnarf]

I was referring to civil action, not criminal. Then the US civil court laws are different than Canada's civil court laws

It's a constitutional challenge, not a civil action. But it can proceed according to different rules of proceedings.

Like you say, you need to have standing to make a constitutional challenge, by being directly or indirectly affected by the law. Public interest groups can also have standing if they can show that ''the law raises a serious constitutional issue, the group has a genuine interest in the matter, and that there is no other reasonable and effective manner in which the issue may be brought before the Court.''

 

[BookerL]

I was referring to civil action, not criminal. Then the US civil court laws are different than Canada's civil court laws

Hi all
In Canada civil laws are under Provincial purview with some limited exceptions .
Quebec is really apart from all the other Provinces as it operates under the civil code Napoleonic based instead of British common law !
It does have major differences

Cheers all


Boooker

 

[gugu]

In the US, US law has a concept in which you cannot be a plaintiff if you are not affected or you not impacted negatively by the defendant's action or in this case by the law.

This was examines thoroughly in first instance (Himel decision). It’s of course the first part of the decision: are they admissible as plaintiffs? I think it’s sufficient to say you have not really stopped permanently. In any way, the law has already deprived them of their constitutional rights. The Appeal and Supreme Court dealt with it in few lines.

So I am thinking this woman is extremely histrionic. She has taken an industry, the escort industry, which is operating fairly well and safely in Canada, and its about to be turned upside down because of her court challenge, which does not affect her (she's retired).

That is unjust not only towards her but also towards many with her. It’s true a lot of sex workers had a predictable, but effective, attitude “I got no problem. I cause no trouble. It may as well stay just like it is. I kind of like it to stay underground anyway. I don’t mind brothels on main street, but I’ll stay away from them personally.” True. But no one would have complained, quite the contrary, if we had simple decriminalization like New Zealand. All would have applauded.

She misbehaves while testifying before them.

Considering the legislation imposed by the Conservatives, I’ll give her one or two free tickets to get infuriated anywhere she wants, including the House committee. What troubles me however is that Joyal (Liberal MP) who was asking the questions when she did burst, was doing his best to help make her points. [/QUOTE]

 

[BookerL]

Hi all and Gugu

That is unjust not only towards her but also towards many with her. It’s true a lot of sex workers had a predictable, but effective, attitude “I got no problem. I cause no trouble. It may as well stay just like it is. I kind of like it to stay underground anyway. I don’t mind brothels on main street, but I’ll stay away from them personally.” True. But no one would have complained, quite the contrary, if we had simple decriminalization like New Zealand. All would have applauded.

Obviously if that scenario would of happen it would be different ,however whenever someone is challenging the constitutionality of a law best case scenarios must evaluated and worst scenarios too and what is the most likely to happen .
Evidently the group failed in that process and it is because of that failing that all is happening now .
The success must be seen through the entire events not only the SSC decision at the end if the situation is worst, the successful challenge isn't really that successful .
Some event are foreseeable a conservative party opting for Decriminalization of prostitution was highly unlikely ,the fiasco was highly predictable .
Shame for fame ????Hummmmmm


Warmest Regards


Booker

 

[daydreamer41]

US procedural rules and rules on standing are irrelevant in Canadian constitutional cases.

I don't expect Canada to use US rules / law. I was asking what the law was and making a comparison. My question was answered by gugu in his post.

 

[BookerL]

Quebec has its own civil code. The Napoleonic code has never been in use in Quebec.

Hi johnhenrygalt .
My statement was

Quebec is really apart from all the other Provinces as it operates under the civil code Napoleonic based instead of British common law !
It does have major differences

The word based is use but I could of said inspired,take is origines ,similar ,
Whatever word you prefer it is apart from the rest of Canada ,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Code_of_Quebec
The substantive law of the 1866 Civil Code of Lower Canada was derived primarily from the judicial interpretations of the law that had been in force to that date in Lower Canada. The work of the Commission on codification was also inspired by some of the modernizations found in the 1804 Napoleonic code.

http://www.pc.gc.ca/eng/lhn-nhs/qc/stlaurent/natcul/natcul2/natcul2a.aspx

Louis S. St. Laurent National Historic Site of Canada
Civil Code and Common Law:

Two Separate Systems
Title page of the Civil Code of Quebec, 1904
© Bibliothèque nationale du Québec / Louis Rioux

The Canada Encyclopedia defines a Civil Code as a "fundamental legislative enactment which contains a comprehensive and easily understood statement of a nation's private LAW. It is typically found in legal systems whose traditions are traceable to Roman law 1 ." A Civil Code "expounds only on matters of private law [...]. It consolidates the fundamental concepts, rules, principles and ideals of a legal tradition in a clear non-technical style 2 [...]."

Common Law is an unwritten legal system which is based on "decisions handed down by Courts, thus allowing the gradual establishment of principles and rules of conduct whose authority is essentially founded on immemorial use and custom [ Translation ] 3 ." This system applies to most English-language countries and all Canadian provinces, except for Quebec.

From the Custom of Paris to the Civil Code of Quebec


Laws of England
© Bibliothèque nationale du Québec / Louis Rioux

The Civil Code now current in Quebec is based on the Napoleonic Code which, in turn, has a great number of provisions derived from the Custom of Paris which was introduced in New France in 1663. It is thus different from Common Law practised in England and in the other Canadian provinces.

Whereas Common Law is based on non-codified judgments handed down at an earlier time (jurisprudence), the Civil Code is based on provisions and regulations that have already been codified.

In Canada, only Quebec has its own Civil Code. It was in 1857 that the Parliament of United Canada decided to codify all the civil statutes of Lower Canada and to bring them together in one bilingual collection. The Commission of Codification then tabled a new Civil Code which came into force in 1866: the Civil Code of Lower Canada.

Over the following years, in spite of the development of society, the Civil Code hardly changed. Instead, special and independent laws gradually replaced those provisions of the Code which were less adapted to the expectations of a developing society.
Civil Code of Quebec
© Bibliothèque nationale du Québec / Louis Rioux

In 1955, the Quebec Legislature ordered the reform of the Civil Code. The task was entrusted to the Civil Code Review Bureau. This body dealt first with those matters most urgently in need of reform, before undertaking a complete revision of the Code. In 1981, a new Quebec Civil Code was enacted. However, only certain recommendations involving family law came into force immediately. It was not until 1984 that the new Quebec Civil Code, in ten books, finally replaced the Civil Code of Lower Canada.

Sources:

Brierley, John E. C, "Common Law", The Canadian Encyclopedia, Edmonton, Hurtig Publishers, Vol. 1, c1988.

MacDonald, R. A, "Civil Code", The Canadian Encyclopedia, Edmonton, Hurtig Publishers, Vol. 1, c1988.

Quinn, Majella and Claude Marcil, Louis-S. St-Laurent, Jurist, Politician and Statesman, Ottawa, Minister of Supply and Services Canada, c1982, 47 p.

Reid, Hubert, Dictionnaire de droit québécois et canadien avec lexique anglais-français, Montréal, Wilson & Lafleur Ltée, 1994, 769 p.

1. R. A. MacDonald, "Civil Code", The Canadian Encyclopedia, Edmonton, Hurtig Publishers, Vol. 1, 1988, pp. 429-430.

2. Ibid .

3. Hubert Reid, Dictionnaire de droit québécois et canadien avec lexique anglais-français, Montréal, Wilson & Lafleur Ltée, 1994, p. 104


Good reading johnhenrygalt


Warmest Regards

Booker

 

[BookerL]

14. How is a case brought before the Supreme Court of Canada?

In most cases, appeals are heard by the Court only if leave to appeal is given. Such leave, or permission, will be given by the Court when a case involves a question of public importance.

There are cases, however, where leave is not required. In criminal cases, there is an automatic right of appeal where an acquittal has been set aside in the provincial court of appeal or where one judge in the provincial court of appeal dissents on a question of law. In addition, the Supreme Court of Canada has a special kind of "Reference" jurisdiction, original in character, given by s. 53 of the Supreme Court Act. The Governor in Council (federal government) may refer to the Court, for its opinion, constitutional or other questions.

Regards


Booker

 

[Numerati]

Really sucks this bill goes through. What makes this even more terrible is that finally the USD is gaining some strength.

 

[BookerL]

Historical facts cannot be change

Hi all

What is setting Quebec apartfrom the rest of Canada on laws

Quebec is really apart from all the other Provinces as it operates under the civil code Napoleonic based instead of British common law !
It does have major differences

Setting apart !Meaning differences ,not the same

The original post was referred to matters constitutional and procedural in nature, namely the standing of an individual not charged with a criminal offense or directly involved in a dispute to challenge the constitutionality of a provision of criminal law. Quebec's civil procedural rules are derived from English common law and our constitutional law and criminal law (including procedural matters) are from the English tradition (and are federal).

Quotation open and closed
Definition
Civil law is the kind of law that evolved from Roman law, based on a written “civil code”. This was adopted in France after the French Revolution in 1789. Called the Code Napoléon, it covered only matters of private law:
• The legal attributes of a person (e.g.: name, age of majority)
• The relationship between individuals (e.g.: marriage, adoption, parentage)
• Property (e.g.: possession, land boundaries)
• The legal institutions governing or administering these relationships (e.g.: wills, sales, leases, partnerships)
Through plain language and the specific nature of each regulation, civil codes are intended to be easy to understand and apply. It does not rely on precedent to the same extent as common law.
Civil law is used in many countries in Europe as well as in Quebec.
http://www.canadiana.ca/citm/specifique/lois_e.pdf

Only the substantive private civil law, and only that portion which is constitutionally under provincial jurisdiction, is based on the Roman civil law tradition. While the draughtsmen of the Civil Code of Lower Canada consulted the 1804 Code civil des français, the Lower Canada code was not really "based on" the work produced in France during Napoleon's regime. The current Civil Code of Quebec, adopted in 1994, was based on the work of the Office de révision du Code civil du Québec. Again, they consulted foreign sources, but the resultant code cannot reasonably be said to be "based on" such foreign law. In Quebec, procedural matters, criminal matters, constitutional matters, corporate law matters, rules of evidence, organization of the courts, rules on standing, securities regulation, income taxation, not to mention our entire system of representative government, are all based on the English tradition.

The reasons for the civil code in Quebec?
http://www.republiquelibre.org/cousture/BAS2.HTM
1763: Signature of the treaty of Paris that concedes all of French North America to Great Britain, with the exception of the Saint-Pierre and Miquelon islands. The Test Act is established to keep the French-speaking Catholics from holding government office. The territory is considerably reduced.
In October of the same year, London issues its «Royal Proclamation», thus allowing French-speakers to practice their religion. But Great Britain lets governor Murray know of its plans to found Protestant schools to assimilate the population. The proclamation also wants to replace the old French civil code of law by the British Common Law. Governor Murray judges this measure unrealistic and decides to keep the French civil laws.
Has for income taxation laws they where implemented as for a war effort temporary measures http://www.duhaime.org/LawMuseum/CanadianLegalHistory/LawArticle-168/1917-Birth-of-Income-Tax.aspx
At least not until the House went into Committee of the Whole, on July 25, 1917.

On that day, the 50-year old finance minister tabled a resolution which called for income tax: 4% on all income of single men over $2,000. For others, the personal exemption was $3,000.

For those Canadians with annual incomes of more than $6,000, the tax rate ranged from 2 to 25 per cent.
White hoped his tax would not much outlast the war.

In fact, he insisted on calling his bill the "War Tax Upon Income" bill.

But conventional wisdom was best expressed by opposition finance critic, Alexander Maclean (Maclean):

"I have no doubt, that once we have embarked upon it, the judgment of the country will be that it should be continued for many years to come."

Maclean was not to be mistaken.

Soon, a hundred years will have passed since the federal government received the authority to levy a temporary "war" income tax upon Canadians.


Regards all


Booker