UPDATE SEPTEMBER 19, 2015: SEE ALSO DISCLAIMER AND LITIGATION UPDATES.
[This post, which began in May and having over 1000 revisions and 2000 comments, is being retired from service and updates. It lived through the success of reaching a total of $500,000 in donations from our kind, dear supporters who had little money to give, the hope and disappointment with the summary trial decision, and the certainty that we are now finally moving on to the Charter trial.]
CANADIAN CHARTER TRIAL UPDATE:
— We have instructed the Arvay team to prepare for the “Constitutional-Charter” trial. This means that our focus now, as it was in the beginning of our lawsuit, is on the Charter trial.
Unless there is a new expense in the future that we have not anticipated, the monies from your donations will be sufficient to take us through the “constitutional-charter” trial in Federal Court. However, to pay other legal bills we will need additional donations from our supporters, and a request for donations will appear on another post soon.
OUR LITIGATION HISTORY:
One year ago, on August 11, 2014, Litigator Joseph Arvay filed a FATCA IGA lawsuit in Canada Federal Court on behalf of Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty (en français), and all peoples.
Because of a Government delay we initiated a “summary trial”, using a portion of the arguments, which offered the possibility of preventing private banking information from being turned over to the IRS before September 30, 2015. See Alliance’s Claims, our Alliance blog, and AUGUST 4-5 SUMMARY TRIAL FILINGS in LITIGATION UPDATES.
Very interesting post on Jack Townsend’s blog today. I am curious as to whether or not the points made the in the Townsend’s blog entry would have any bearing upon today’s court case. I will assume that the Avary team is well aware of this recent development occurring on the Switzerland front. The blog directly refers to the standard of exchange of information as referred to in Article 26 (Exchange of Information) of the 1996 U.S.-Switzerland and how the IRS is trying to work around it.
@Bubblebustin:
“Justice noted that a Canadian only spouse sharing an account with a USP will be reported.”
BOOM!
@wonderful Brockers. Mr Arvay is brilliant, absolutely brilliant. . I am gobsmacked by the paucity of intellect apparent in the govt’s lawyers arguments . it reads like something out of Dickens- except you could not make this stuff up. mark twain paraphrased -“FATCA is stranger than fiction…. Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities. FATCA isn’t”
All lawyers can expect questions from a judge. That’s what you need to prepare for. Honestly if a judge ever said to me do you want me to stop asking questions, would that be simpler for you etc., I would take my law degree out of its frame and put it in the paper shredder and head for the hills.
My sincere apology for the misspelling of Joe Arvay’s name. No disrespect intended.
I am really appreciating the updates. And thank you, Ginny, for your perspective and thoughts as you relay comments.
Seems to be Intellectual content and understanding on one side, and “small” arguments and expediency on the other.
Yes, a Canadian spouse will be reported. BUT what about the CANADIAN only employer, if you have signing authority? How do we know that the bank will not report those accounts?
@Ginny etc.
Any idea when the transcripts for each day will be made available to the public? I’m just itching to read the actual testimony and questions from the judge. In the meantime, thank you so much for your live-blogging.
Three Moody’s lawyers are present today. Roy Berg immediately went over to talk to the Crown lawyers prior to beginning of the day’s proceedings. In addition, the three Moodys lawyers have been conferring in a lawyer’s conference room outside the actual courtroom.
I am a Canadian only spouse and this fully affects my personal privacy. I’d like to know how the judge will respond to that. I know how my Aboriginal lawyer did…….
@ Deckard1138
My answer will disappoint. Transcripts are not published in Canada. You can possibly order your own for a few thousand dollars. ;-(
@canoe
thanks for your comments.
@ Ann I hope the signing authority question gets addressed in the limited time available
Why are Moody’s lawyers conferring with the Crown’s lawyer?
They must feel that the Crown lawyers need some coaching.
@ALL
It seems from the wonderful tidbits forwarded by our TEAM in Vancouver that Justice Martineau “gets” the FATCA follies. Thank God. It also seems that the Govt Lawyers are crumbling with their headaches. I therefore have to ask the question:
Is the Govt side so truly incompetent or Was the Govt aware that they had such an appallingly bad case that they are HOPING to lose so that they can crawl to Washington and say “It wasn’t our fault Boss, the Court made us dump FATCA”? And thereby try to evade responsibility with the Canadian Voters when Boss Obama gets vexed and if the Banking sector gets a hit.
It aint over till its over.
And I would reiterate Dr. Kish’s comment. We obviously have a very interactive Judge sitting on the bench. He has been posing questions to both sides in this hearing. We should not, from those questions infer he is taking either side.
@Ann #1 my Nan once said something about birds of a feather…..
@Tricia …. so the Lawyers for the Crown are consorting with persons who may be deemed agents of a Foreign Power !?!
@Deckard1138 and @Ginny
I seem to remember reading that Video on CDs of the proceedings are / will be available for a nominal sum …. I seem to recollect something like $15 or $50 or some such sum. Maybe one of the Brockers in Vancouver could ask an officer of the court.
I think we might be heading to the lunch break time. Please note I have no fundraising skills whatsoever, but I would hope that people would review Schubert1975’s comments from yesterday:
Every little bit helps. And if anything like a tenth of the estimates of how many Canadians (not to mention supporters from outside our borders) are affected, is close to accurate, if all those folks gave even $10 the bills would be paid with lots of change to spare. So either the numbers are wrong, or too many people aren’t listening or aren’t pulling their weight on behalf of all and maybe are hoping everyone else will do it for them. Shame on you, if that describes you.
+++++
Let’s get the word out to as many as possible and engage some new donors. I remain very grateful to the small group from many countries who have donated so generously to enable us to be in Court today.
Your trust in me and Gwen, in ADCS and our legal team means everything to us.
Please remind me of Roy Berg’s role in all this.
We had to go out for a few hours so I”m late to the BINGO game. My free square, in honour of Mr. Berg’s august attendance, would be: Defendants’ council says: “Don’t listen to the plaintiffs’ arguments. They’re all just jingoistic hyperbolic rhetoric.”
To understand that new Brockers might want to watch the Canadian Standing Finance Committee hearings RE: Bill C-31 which were held mid-May of 2014.
https //www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxJf_Lk-yig (replace the colon)
My uneducated guess is Roy Berg is probably working for the government in some role. I would be pretty shocked if he was actually helping them for free. Having said that the fact the government hired Berg seems to indicate they really had to scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Roy Berg is a compliance vulture who stands to make a lot of money with the IGA in place.
@NorthernShrike …. Mr Berg’s role seems to me to have been “US Person Cross Border Interferer in Chief” to minimize the Value of Canadian Sovereignty and to maximize revenues for the Compliance Condors.
@nervous investor:
“so the Lawyers for the Crown are consorting with persons who may be deemed agents of a Foreign Power !?!”
Shall I assume that was one of your Bingo squares. Good catch.
I think I may have to create a second Bingo card for the afternoon. Mine has now been almost filled up.
This is like watching a Boxing Match and cheering your chosen Pugilist every time he or she lands a telling blow and praising the Referee as he examines points scored. Of course one never knows the result of the Match until the very end … whether determined on Points or by Knock Out.