- Joined
- Dec 31, 2019
Prediction:
This is the wave that is going to get Captain Troon declared a vexatious litigant. I assume that Canada observes the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata, which essentially provide that when a case/controversy (res judicata) or "issue" (collateral estoppel) in one suit has already been litigated in a prior proceeding wherein the litigant was offered a full and fair oppotunity to present his case, that litigant cannot then seek to re-litigate the same controversy or issue in a susequent legal proceeding. The fact that the "first round" might have occured not in a "real civil court" but in what we might call a "quasi-judical proceeding" (I assume BCHRT proceedings would qualify) makes no difference. No second bites at the apple, as we like to say.
Slam-dunk assuming even one defendants' attorney or even concerned local citizen ("any person," I believe I read in an expcerpt from the statute posted earlier) cares enough to undertake the relatively minor expense/make the relatively minor effort involved in preparing and filing the motion. If someone were asking me when I could get it back to them I would quote them 48 hours. One can pull a form Memo of Points and Authorities from all kinds of places, and while putting together the supporting facts and drawing up the declaration(s) takes a bit of time and effort, most of the work has already been done for one in this case by outfits such as Meowmix.
Now Canda.....MAKE IT HAPPEN!!!
Have I stepped through a wormhole and ended up back on Twitter?
This is the wave that is going to get Captain Troon declared a vexatious litigant. I assume that Canada observes the doctrines of collateral estoppel and res judicata, which essentially provide that when a case/controversy (res judicata) or "issue" (collateral estoppel) in one suit has already been litigated in a prior proceeding wherein the litigant was offered a full and fair oppotunity to present his case, that litigant cannot then seek to re-litigate the same controversy or issue in a susequent legal proceeding. The fact that the "first round" might have occured not in a "real civil court" but in what we might call a "quasi-judical proceeding" (I assume BCHRT proceedings would qualify) makes no difference. No second bites at the apple, as we like to say.
Slam-dunk assuming even one defendants' attorney or even concerned local citizen ("any person," I believe I read in an expcerpt from the statute posted earlier) cares enough to undertake the relatively minor expense/make the relatively minor effort involved in preparing and filing the motion. If someone were asking me when I could get it back to them I would quote them 48 hours. One can pull a form Memo of Points and Authorities from all kinds of places, and while putting together the supporting facts and drawing up the declaration(s) takes a bit of time and effort, most of the work has already been done for one in this case by outfits such as Meowmix.
Now Canda.....MAKE IT HAPPEN!!!
Oh Lord.
Have I stepped through a wormhole and ended up back on Twitter?
Last edited:
