Priority of the Fedeal Reserve M4 dream to succeed here

Leave to appeal amended
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And further take notice that the Court of Appeal will be moved at the hearing of this application for an order that:

[1] Under Court of Appeal Rule 4, this leave to appeal is amended and seeks these orders.

[2] Seek an Order to reverse Justice Cole’s decision that the Court had no jurisdiction to make a decision. When it warrants it, the Court can disregard British Columbia’s Constitutional Question Act; and therefore, the Court did have the jurisdiction to strike down Bill 42 section’s 198(1)a & 199(1)a. A Justice has no discretion to deviate from Federal law, and must strictly adhere to Charter Section 33’s court rules approach on a notwithstanding provision.

[3] Seek an order that Bill 42 impugned provisions must be registered under Section 33 of the Charter. This is the first question that the Court should be asking when the Province removed all doubt, and went on record that these provisions do infringe on Charter Section 2b.

[4] Seek an order to have certain topics be excluded from the political advertising definition: the budget deficit and the BC Rail tax indemnity. The Appeal Court has been asked by the Province to validate the election advertising definition and permit the censoring of every topic. It’s very complex to support this complex law. The Court cannot even consider censoring every issue, unless specifics have an opportunity to be raised.

[5] Seek an Order that some of the intervener’s arguments should have been considered, as the discretion to ignore the intervener is based on case law whose subject matter does not define the nature of Democracy.

[6] Seek an Order to reverse Justice Cole’s Charter Section 3 finding. By definition, striking down an election law must mean it violates Section 3. Its’ not logical to find that Section 3 of the Charter information component is kosher with Bill 42, yet it violates the Charter and cannot stand?! There is no discretion to slice this both ways.

[7] Seek a cost order that the plaintiff will not owe any funds to pay for the defendant’s costs, based on BC Court Rules pubic interest doctrine, appendix b, party and party costs 3b.

[8] Seek a cost order that on a successful appeal that the plaintiff’s legal costs are to be reimbursed by the Province. This appeal has a strong pubic interest, and is essential to the administration of law.

“committed industrial sabotage” by running false news reports in Canwest Publishing Inc. (Canwest) newspapers

"The monitor has unequivocally denied having any influence whatsoever over the editorial content of Canwest newspapers and stated that it does not prepare any news releases on behalf of Canwest."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Re: In the Matter of the CCAA Proceedings of Canwest Publishing Inc.

"We have reviewed your complaint made on May 13, 2010 that the monitor in the above proceedings, FTI Consulting Canada Inc., had “committed industrial sabotage” by running false news reports in Canwest Publishing Inc. (Canwest) newspapers to the effect that Canada’s banks are the main backers behind the senior secured creditors $950 million stalking horse bid. The results of our review are as follows.

Information provided by the monitor indicates that the five major Canadian banks, the Bank of Nova Scotia, the Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce, TD Canada Trust, the Bank of Montreal, and the Royal Bank of Canada, are all represented on the steering committee for the senior secured lenders who have advanced the stalking horse bid. Furthermore, the Canadian bank’s share of the total debt of all the members of the steering committee is 63%. In light of the foregoing it cannot be said that the quotes from various newspaper stories you have provided in your May 13, 2010 email are inaccurate or misleading with respect to who is promoting and supporting the senior secured lender’s credit bid.

The monitor has unequivocally denied having any influence whatsoever over the editorial content of Canwest newspapers and stated that it does not prepare any news releases on behalf of Canwest. Our review has not uncovered any evidence that contradicts these statements.

Our review of the information provided by yourself and the facts concerning the alleged issue, as reported by the monitor, have not established any misconduct on the part of the monitor with respect to these proceedings."

Sincerely,
Office of the Superintendent of Bankruptcy Canada
Senior Bankruptcy Analyst







In concluding this matter, we thank you for contacting us and regret that we cannot be of more assistance to you with respect to it.