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.
Marie and all,
I hope we all can all take in the statement from Stephen Kish this morning and wait for further information from Stephen Kish after his and many others’ many long hours of discussions amongst each other and communications with the legal team.
UPDATE SEPTEMBER 18, 2015:
SEE ALSO DISCLAIMER AND LITIGATION UPDATES.
CANADIAN SUMMARY TRIAL AND U.S FATCA LAWSUIT UPDATE:
Why wait? I can’t think of a better time than before it causes the massive devastation it surely will cause when it’s enforced.
My last comment was for Tim in response to his call for a CBT lawsuit (assuming).
I wonder how a judge might feel about awarding court costs with a stay. Would a stay go before the same judge?
I advise we trust the ADCS team to continue to act in our interest.
They have proven that they can move this complex matter forward – tirelessly and relentlessly and with great competence.
The directors of ADCS and the plaintiffs have selflessly given untold thousands of hours of their time to this cause.
They have earned our on-going support.
Bringing this to light in court is big achievement – it is the first of hopefully many court actions against FATCA and similar extra-jurisdictional money and data grabs.
This is NOT “every man for himself.”
This IS “if we don’t all hang together, we shall surely hang separately.”
There are 8 million+ donors out there, 1 million of them in Canada. They just don’t know it yet.
As for whether there will be time to file a motion…
Here in New Hampshire, the cops can get a judge to issue a search warrant in the middle of the night, but when you get arrested you might not even go to an arraignment until Tuesday after the long weekend, because, oh, the court is closed on weekends and holidays.
Seems like they might be applying the same double-standard.
I am in – going to support this till we win!
@Fran; I am in all the way too.
Disclosure, I am in this to lay the groundwork for something that can be used in the EU. The fruit of the tree………..
When the summary trial was floated I was disappointed. The argument Arvey made was brilliant but it was also “clever” if you get what I mean. I am convinced that if all Judges were polled theh half would have agreed and half disagreed. Justice is a crap shoot….period.
Had we won at summary trial the fear was that the “flaw” now exposed in Court could then be “fixed” by both Governments. It was not going to be the fatal blow.
Challenging based on the Charter is another kettle of fish because it comes down to raw discrimination.
FATCA and IGAs are all about racism and discrimination Winning because of that reason places us on much more solid ground.
Now we spent money on the trial, but I think it was a proper decision because something had to be done to help folks. But it was simple a quick and short detour on the way to the Supreme Court of Canada with a Charter Challenge.
We know what the government spent on the summary trial – $35K.
Thank you to everyone involved with the ADCS and all the hours you put into this free of charge. I think some people are curious with what the $500,000 is for. Is it just for the two day summary trial? I am not a lawyer, but someone who is up to date with current events and try’s to keep myself informed as much as possible. $500,000.00 for a two day summary trial seems somewhat high even for one of the top lawyers in Canada. Some clarification in this regard would be helpful.
I suggest a bit more stats on the donations and a contest each month for highest donations – to encourage “high” donations. Some contest for all types of donations as well, such as number of donations each month.
@Bubblebustin
“We know what the government spent on the summary trial – $35K.”
Was that for a team of lawyers or for just one lawyer? Arvay would need to match that, otherwise we would have to embark on a very expensive fundraising campaign to collect millions of dollars. I will remit a bit more to support the cause; however, at the end of the day, I’m just a modest worker on a modest wage in (high tax) Europe.
JC,
Every donation to ADCS-ADSC for the Canadian litigation has the same appreciation value to us – no matter the actual dollar value. Some people just CAN make larger donations than others; they have more under the column *Disposable Income*. Most, I think, either give what they can spare out of their budgets and many more have given more than they can afford, especially with a low or fixed income. Speaking for myself only, I don’t want this to be a contest. I also don’t want donor anonymity in jeopardy as that might close down donations from some.
Took a while to digest this latest news. I read the judgement before going to bed and then had trouble sleeping. But then, after some time passed, and a new day dawned, I thought – well, remember, we knew it was a marathon rather than a sprint. No-one has a crystal ball to see what the best path was.
History has been made already, and this is not over – we went from a few people on a blog, to a whole bunch of people from around the globe, impressive fundraising results and a hearing with an expert legal team, 20 supporters attending, and we know that this is only a waystation. We will keep our eyes on the prize. The judge did not award costs to the government. The constitutional issues are still wide open.
And re the parts of the judgement that refer to what is ‘legal’, or ‘the law’, we know that there have been many instances where ‘the law’ was ethically wrong, unjust, and struck down later.
So, when you feel the sting of disappointment, remember;
Tentanda Via – the way must be tried ….
and
Surgite!
Bless all of you, the ADCS, the Arvay and Gruber team, the IBS stalwarts, all those who read and comment and compile……..
In the darkest of nights when there was no help and no support from anywhere, only fear and anxiety and anger and confusion; out of that darkness disparate and unconnected individuals coalesced into the concrete action that brought us all here together.
As has been said here before, this is only the end of the beginning………
Hear, here, badger!
@ badger
Well said. It boils down to that it’s far, far better to be right where we are today with the awesome group we have travelled with on this journey than to have had to face this outrageous situation with nothing but our own individual wits and the “guidance” of government hacks and compliance condors. Resistance is noble. It provides purpose and hope, even when it cannot take a direct route to its goal. We’ll pass by “Justice” Martineau’s ruling and keep on marching. Our cause is just.
“Justice is a crap shoot….period.”
No it isn’t. Courts are.
Ambrose Bierce explained it in the Devil’s Dictionary.
http://dd.pangyre.org/a/appeal.html
“Appeal
v.t.
In law, to put the dice into the box for another throw.”
Berg’s post mortem:
http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/legalfeeds/2893/atca-injunction-dismissed.html
Former Conservative MP (“ex-communicated”) and blogger Garth Turner offers some insight into Stephen Harper’s personality and character. He doesn’t paint a favourable portrait:
http://www.greaterfool.ca/2015/09/18/the-dilemma-3/
FATCA injunction dismissed
http://www.canadianlawyermag.com/legalfeeds/2893/atca-injunction-dismissed.html
True or False? : “He added the court did not rule on whether the IGA or the Canadian implementing legislation violates the Constitution or and those issues will be determined in another trial scheduled for late 2016.”
@JC True. Except there is no fixed date.
We’ll see if they allow any comments-I submitted one but it has to be approved first……..would be good if others also try
@ADCS, “we have not anticipated, the monies from your donations will be sufficient to take us through the “constitutional-charter” trial in Federal Court.”
I am glad that I made another donation after that poor ruling, it was good for my health!!! So please check the PO Box!!
But next, $500,000 CDN, got us a summary trial, AND through a Federal Court Charter Trial?
That is a BARGAIN!!!!
I definitely got my moneys worth!!!
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
One more thing…….I am sleeping better at night because Team ADCS is sharing my/our burden and I do not live in Canada!!
ADCS Team: It’s such good news that the $500,000 already collected is anticipated to sustain us right through the constitutional charter trial except for possible unanticipated expenses. I’m sure we’re all very happy with that news!
Tim: regarding the need for a “more direct challenge of the US ‘right’ under international law to impose CBT” I surely agree with you and eagerly await such a challenge if you are referring to a lawsuit. But, in fact, a “challenge” (to which we are still awaiting substantive response) has already been “filed” in the shape of our formal complaint to the United Nations Human Rights Commission. The Complaint names CBT as its central target.
The final sentence of the complaint itself reads, “Bring an end to CBT, once and for all, so that finally every human being on the planet will be subject to taxation only by the governments that serve them.”
Our case was supposedly reviewed by a UN committee during the week of August 17-21 but we have not heard the result. We will be emailing them on Monday, Sept. 21 (we think a month is enough time for them to have notified us) to request information on the status of our submission. We’ll let you know what and when we find out.
I’m glad they $500K already raised will bring the full Constitutional-Charter case to trial.
It sounds like this will be in a Federal Court.
Is there any mechanism to advance directly to the Supreme Court of Canada SCC), considering the likelihood of appeals by both sides of every lower court decision? Can the Federal Court itself make this referral, if it feels the matter is sufficiently fundamental and pressing?
Also, the SCC is required to give an opinion on questions referred to it by the Governor-in-Council (the Cabinet). If the NDP forms the new government, can they refer the FATCA IGA provisions of C31 directly to SCC, thus bypassing the lower court trials? And if this happened, would the ADCS counsel still be allowed to plead its case arguments before the court?