The Forum Site - Join the conversation
Forums: Society & Lifestyles:
Law

Applications To Federal Court

Reply to Topic
AuthorMessage
odin On November 28, 2006




Toronto, Canada
#1New Post! Dec 16, 2005 @ 16:57:17
Anyone know why a Judical Review is considered a class action under Part IV of the Federal Court Rules and applications for all other matters are located in Part V ?

This just concerns me because under Part 5 there are subsections for divorce proceedings and arbital awards which would be deemed to be a class action under PArt IV.

Furthermore in my application to the Federal Court would my Application For Leave To Appeal to the Supreme Court be considered material in possesion of a tribunal or reference from a tribunal as described in PArt V,and if so do i include the factum for Leave To Appeal along with the application to the Federal Court as it does not indicate under rule 301 whether this is considered documentary evidence as the application is not a judical review under PArt IV BUT a judical review of an administrative action under
PArt V [Rule 300(a)].
treebee On April 13, 2015
Government Hooker

Moderator




London, United Kingdom
#2New Post! Dec 16, 2005 @ 17:46:20
misunderstood On June 24, 2014
Persuasive Madam!





How about you come find me....
#3New Post! Dec 16, 2005 @ 17:51:41
@treebee Said


bahahahaha!!!!!!
reiko On March 27, 2006

Deleted



New York, New York
#4New Post! Dec 16, 2005 @ 17:51:52
They did it under part IV because part VI subparagraph A section 2 said to use part VII but under section c of VII referred them to part IV.
misunderstood On June 24, 2014
Persuasive Madam!





How about you come find me....
#5New Post! Dec 16, 2005 @ 17:52:44
@reiko Said
They did it under part IV because part VI subparagraph A section 2 said to use part VII but under section c of VII referred them to part IV.


odin On November 28, 2006




Toronto, Canada
#6New Post! Dec 17, 2005 @ 17:04:54
@reiko Said
They did it under part IV because part VI subparagraph A section 2 said to use part VII but under section c of VII referred them to part IV.



Actually I am referring to the rules of the Federal Court. There are no sections,just subsections.

Sections are a statutory limitation or power.
Rules are a directive for procedure
treebee On April 13, 2015
Government Hooker

Moderator




London, United Kingdom
#7New Post! Dec 19, 2005 @ 15:23:37
@odin Said
Actually I am referring to the rules of the Federal Court. There are no sections,just subsections.

Sections are a statutory limitation or power.
Rules are a directive for procedure


odin On November 28, 2006




Toronto, Canada
#8New Post! Dec 20, 2005 @ 01:18:47
I dont know what is so amusing. You think that civil ltigation is a funny thing? You should try it in a criminal court proceeding where you have Federal Charges intertwined with breaches of orders...and likewise Federal Court Order Violations intertwined with Provencial Court Order Charges where the conditions breached are criminally regulated.

There is a big difference to being charged with a breach of probation on a summary conviction and being indicted.

A summary conviction means that if the condition is not criminally regulated then the maximum you can get is six months as prescribed in s.787 of the Canada Criminal Code.

An indictment means that you can be tried for each breach consecutivly(joinder) and convicted concurently.

This may be a bunch of mumble jumble but in the view of the law when conducting a defence can make a difference between 3 years in jail and three months in jail.

In any case since court order violations are strict liability offences in the aspect that you cannot be detained without sufficient grounds.In other words there has to be evidence that the breach existed.
odin On November 28, 2006




Toronto, Canada
#9New Post! Dec 20, 2005 @ 01:19:56
@odin Said
I dont know what is so amusing. You think that civil ltigation is a funny thing? You should try it in a criminal court proceeding where you have Federal Charges intertwined with breaches of orders...and likewise Federal Court Order Violations intertwined with Provencial Court Order Charges where the conditions breached are criminally regulated.

There is a big difference to being charged with a breach of probation on a summary conviction and being indicted.

A summary conviction means that if the condition is not criminally regulated then the maximum you can get is six months as prescribed in s.787 of the Canada Criminal Code.

An indictment means that you can be tried for each breach consecutivly(joinder) and convicted concurently.

This may be a bunch of mumble jumble but in the view of the law when conducting a defence can make a difference between 3 years in jail and three months in jail.

In any case since court order violations are strict liability offences in the aspect that you cannot be detained without sufficient grounds there has to be evidence that the breach existed or the alledged offence took place.
Reply to Topic<< Previous Topic | Next Topic >>

1 browsing (0 members - 1 guest)

Quick Reply
Be Respectful of Others

      
Subscribe to topic prefs

Similar Topics
    Forum Topic Last Post Replies Views
New posts   Racism
Thu Feb 23, 2012 @ 04:54
3 969
New posts   Politics
Sat Feb 21, 2009 @ 21:11
7 849
New posts   Politics
Sun Feb 15, 2009 @ 02:28
16 1024
New posts   Politics
Thu Jan 15, 2009 @ 07:56
0 243
New posts   Pics & Videos
Wed May 21, 2008 @ 00:14
1 479