Friday, June 28, 2013
Thursday, June 27, 2013
U of O student wins new hearing to have guns, ammo returned
By Andrew Seymour, OTTAWA CITIZEN June 27, 2013
Labels:
guns seized,
legal action,
over reaction,
police,
student life
U of O Law school’s management of students with disabilities rapped (Common Law)
Law school’s management of students with disabilities rapped
June 26, 2013 article in Legal Feeds, by Heather Gardiner
Monday, June 10, 2013
On-going story of an application to the Supreme Court of Canada
When is it OK in a democratic society for a court to ignore a complaint of bias of the court? Is it acceptable for the rules of the court to permit circumventing a bias complaint? Can a judge refuse to hear and determine a complaint about his/her own apparent bias? Is being heard on a bias question in order to overturn decisions of a judge a Charter right? Will the Supreme Court of Canada find these questions of sufficient importance to hear the appeal?
At least the last of these questions will be answered in the coming months. Here is how the story has unfolded to date:
At least the last of these questions will be answered in the coming months. Here is how the story has unfolded to date:
- 2013-01-07::: Rancourt's Application for Leave to Appeal filed to the Supreme Court of Canada, to appeal from the November 29, 2012 decision of Justice Peter Annis to not grant an appeal regarding the defendant's complaints about reasonable apprehension of bias. Full-Application-SCC.
- 2013-01-14 to 2013-01-25::: Letters to and from the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada::: 2013-01-10-Dearden-to-Registrar, 2013-01-14-Rancourt-to-Registrar, 2013-01-14-Doody-to-Registrar, 2013-01-15-Dearden-to-Registrar, 2013-01-15-Rancourt-to-Registrar, 2013-01-25-Registrar-to-Rancourt.
- 2013-02-13::: Motion to a Judge, filed to the Supreme Court of Canada, motion to set aside Registrar's January 25, 2013 order. Full-Motion-SCC.
- 2013-02-14::: Letter of St. Lewis via Richard Dearden to SCC Registrar, asking that Registrar "not accept" Rancourt's Motion to a Judge. 2013-02-14-Dearden-to-Registrar.
- 2013-02-22::: Letter of U of O via Peter Doody to SCC Registrar, echoing Dearden's request to "not accept" Rancourt's Motion to a Judge. 2013-02-22-Doody-to-Registrar.
- 2013-02-22::: Letter of SCC Registrar Roger Bilodeau to Rancourt, not accepting Motion to a Judge for filing. 2012-02-22-Registrar-to-Rancourt.
- 2013-03-04::: Ontario Civil Liberties Association's letter to the Chief Justice of Canada, about SCC Registrar's conduct. LINK. Followed by THIS, and then THIS.
- 2013-04-08::: Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada changes his mind, accepts to file Rancourt's Application for leave to appeal: Registrar's letter.
- 2013-04-09::: Rancourt re-files his Application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: Full-Application-SCC.
- 2013-04-11::: Supreme Court of Canada Registry letter to Rancourt -- Materials filed, File Number assigned: Registry's letter.
- 2013-04-19::: Supreme Court of Canada responds to the Ontario Civil Liberties Association about Registrar's conduct: SCC-letter-OCLA.*
- 2013-05-09::: U of O submissions for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: UofO-Mem-Arg-SCC.
- 2013-05-09::: St. Lewis's submissions for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: StL-Mem-Arg-SCC.
- 2013-05-21::: Rancourt's REPLY for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada: DGR-Reply-SCC.
Sunday, June 9, 2013
Another dubious distinction for U of O: No easy access to information
University of Ottawa again topped list of formal requests for information last year (LINK)
By Neco Cockburn, OTTAWA CITIZEN June 7, 2013
The University's spin is poor:
No mention of how the U of O routinely claims that access to information requests are made in bad faith, only to be ordered or otherwise convinced to comply: PO-3121, PO-2974.
Or of how often the U of O simply disregards the access to information law and must be ordered to produce a response: PO-3043, PO-2671, PO-2698.
The only case where the University's claim that a request is made in bad faith was upheld is the case mentioned by the spin doctor: PO-3188.
By Neco Cockburn, OTTAWA CITIZEN June 7, 2013
The University's spin is poor:
No mention of how the U of O routinely claims that access to information requests are made in bad faith, only to be ordered or otherwise convinced to comply: PO-3121, PO-2974.
Or of how often the U of O simply disregards the access to information law and must be ordered to produce a response: PO-3043, PO-2671, PO-2698.
The only case where the University's claim that a request is made in bad faith was upheld is the case mentioned by the spin doctor: PO-3188.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)