Now appears more likely that we will get to trial in January 2019 in our Canadian FATCA IGA enabling legislation lawsuit in Federal Court.
The Case Management Judge has just advised:
“The hearing of this summary trial motion shall take place before this Court at the Federal Court, 701 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, on Monday, the 28th day of January, 2019, at 9:30 in the forenoon for a maximum duration of five (5) days. The number of hearing days may be reduced depending on the number of preliminary motions.”
Other:
“The following timetable shall apply to the motion for summary trial: (a) The Defendant [Mr. Trudeau’s attorneys] shall serve her evidence (with the exception of one expert report) by April 16, 2018. (b) The Defendant shall serve her remaining expert report by April 30, 2018. (c) Notice of any objections to expert reports shall be served by June 15, 2018. (d) A case management conference shall be held, by teleconference, on July 12, 2018 at 1:00 pm (Eastern) to address any motion to strike affidavits. (e) All cross-examinations shall be completed by July 31, 2018. (f) The Plaintiffs [Gwen and Kazia] shall serve and file their complete motion record by September 28, 2018. (g) The Defendant shall serve and file her complete responding motion record by November 16, 2018. (h) The Plaintiffs shall serve and file their reply submissions by December 7, 2018.
Well I know what I’m doing January 28, 2019.
BB, see you there…
I will plan to be there as well.
The wheels of justice do indeed turn slowly. We can only hope they “grind exceedingly fine.”
Best wishes to the plaintiffs and our side, and thanks to you, Stephen, and our lawyers.
Congratulations on this milestone! I will definitely be there on the 28th for as much of the week as possible! How likely do you think it is that the trial will go the full five days or is it indeed likely that it will be shortened? As they say “see you in court”!!
I’ve marked my calendar for this landmark event. See you all there!
Two other questions if anyone knows–the defendant is referred to in the singular–“Defendant”, “her” rather than “Defendants”, “their”. Is the Defendant the Attorney General or the Minister of National Revenue? Both are women. If the Attorney General only does that mean that the Income Tax Act part of the claims will not be revisited in this new trial?
Curious also that they use the rather archaic word “forenoon”.
Dash: Forenoon? The wheels of justice turn so slowly they’re still back in the 19th century! 🙂
I’ll do my darndest to be in the courtroom, too. It’s great to finally be able to put a date on the calendar!
@Dash1729
They still wear horsehair wigs in the UK!
Isn’t the Queen the defendant?
@Norman Diamond
That possibility occurred to me. I had thought though when referring to the Queen as defendant one would say “The Crown” rather than “her”. But certainly the Queen is ultimately the Defendant so you have a valid point. The Queen ought to be more sympathetic actually since her future granddaughter in law–not to mention her late aunt–has the US taint.
Will any of this new documentation information be public before the trial?
One would hope that with the escalation of the money-grab (now in the form of the transition tax) – somebody up there might finally be interested in enforcing and protecting the Canadian Charter of Rights over and beyond complying with American demands. It should look like this: “Sorry America – but we are a sovereign nation and we have to protect our own constitution and governmental funds so we can`t give in to you anymore.” I honestly think that if somebody doesn’t say no, then America will find more and more ways to increase taxes for residents of other nations. Its like with any form of blackmail. When they realise it works, the demands increase. It is what we have been witnessing all along.
“The Queen ought to be more sympathetic actually since her future granddaughter in law–not to mention her late aunt–has the US taint.”
Right. I look forward to Her Majesty v. Her Majesty.
Somebody should ask Prince Harry what he thinks of his fiancee’s US taint.
(rimshot)
I would think after talking to their accountants Harry and the Queen would ‘not be amused’.
: -)
https://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2017/11/27/the-prince-harry-and-the-u-s-person-meghan-markle-engagement-i-bet-they-have-no-idea/
“certainly the Queen is ultimately the Defendant ”
According to Wikipedia, the Queen is on the Bench:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Court_system_of_Canada
Dash, The original Defendant in our lawsuit was the Attorney General, who is also the Minister of Justice. Later our litigators added a second Defendant, the Minister of National Revenue. An obligation of the Minister of Justice is to ensure that the laws of Canada (e.g., the FATCA IGA enabling legislation) do not violate our Charter of Rights.
Technically, we are not suing Canada.
JC, Yes, we will make on Brock the key documents available before the trial when we are allowed to make them public.
Polly, you say: “Sorry America – but we are a sovereign nation and we have to protect our own constitution and governmental funds so we can`t give in to you anymore.” We hope that the Federal Court Justice agrees.
I would be there in spirit.
All the efforts to solve the expat tax problem is an exercise in futility and a waste of money. The only solution to the problem lies within the 80,000 page tax code. It simply cannot be fixed no matter what the Tax accountants, lawyers and preparation experts say.
One solution is to void the entire code and replace it with the FairTax. That is the only long term solution.
The short term is to play their game. Get a lobbyist who was a member on the Ways and Means committee, before he or she retired. They will know how to present the bribe, yes I said bribe, it is veiled as ”campaign contributions”and every house member is an expert on the art of the demand in the right hand and the check in the left. Do the right hand demand and it Unfreezes the left. Fail the right and you can forget the left.
Canadian Federal Court FATCA IGA lawsuit: Minor update on dates and activities:
[In this lawsuit Canada argues that it is good to round up and turn over some Canadian citizens to the IRS — because the United States is a very very powerful country that promises to harm Canada if she does not comply with the turnover.]
It is not unexpected that Government will try to strike out our portions of our affidavits. The dates that this will happen have now been fixed by the court in our Canadian lawsuit:
This activity should not result in delay in our trial, which is scheduled for the end of January 2019.
Previously the court provided these dates:
AND
@ Stephen Kish
I’m always grateful to see your updates on our lawsuit but it sounds to me like the government wants Gwen and Kazia to write their affidavits, not as they see sit fit, but as how the government sees fit. That hardly seems fitting to me. If our plaintiffs are forced to write in a voice that is not their own then whose affidavits are they anyway? IMHO our Canadian court system is often anti-Logos and it is as slow as molasses too. However I could be interpreting this incorrectly. Once again I applaud Gwen and Kazia for their courage and for their patience. It has got to be hard on them, waiting and wading through all the government’s delaying tactics.
EmBee,
My understanding is that the Government will only ask the court to delete portions of the affidavits that it feels do not conform to the rules and that this common legal back and forth will not involve any delay in the trial. Yes, Gwen and Kazia are very special Canadians and Canada is very fortunate in having their support.
Thanks, Stephen. It seems that the government must “feel” differently about those rules than our side so I hope that whatever gets deleted does not substantially change the essence of those affidavits.