Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Bank of Canada's semi-secret lawsuit.


Special Ed

Recommended Posts

http://talkdigitalnetwork.com/2015/02/bank-of-canada-semi-secret-law-suit/

Listen to the first part of the podcast. This was just sent to me by my father so trying to wrap my head around it. He tends to exaggerate so I'm not sure how credible this source is. Although wouldn't surprise me if the banks have pulled another scam here. You can't rob the banks but they can rob you with impunity. My understanding is the lawsuit basically says in 1979 the federal government stopped enforcing an agreement with the bank and we were taxed on infrastructure when we should not have been. That we are owed considerable tax rebates going back to 1979. while the government wants to kill the story (probably because they allowed it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So when is our rebate coming?

I don't know but apparently it's suppose to be massive. Like in the billions lol. All tax off infrastructure for the country since 1979. How much per year we put into the infastructure? I imagine quite a bit probably too much for them to even attempt to pay back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like nonsense to me.

Contrary to the claim in the podcast, the Bank of Canada is not privately held, but is owned by the Canadian government, and any operating profit is transferred back to the government.

Regarding the law-suit itself, I think it is referring to the one brought forth by COMMITTEE FOR MONETARY AND ECONOMIC REFORM against the crown (and Bank of Canada). Having skimmed through the court files, it seems to be groundless: no where in the Bank of Canada Act does it require the BoC to make interest free loans.

It was dismissed by the initial judge, and on appeal the judge agreed that the suit is frivolous in its current form:

Conclusions
[101] If these paragraphs are struck, it is then my view that, in accordance with Rule 221, the entire Claim discloses no reasonable cause of action, is scandalous and vexatious, and is an abuse of the process of the Court. However, there is a possibility that these problems could be remedied by appropriate amendments. For this reason, then, the Claim should be struck in its entirety with leave to amend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like nonsense to me.

Contrary to the claim in the podcast, the Bank of Canada is not privately held, but is owned by the Canadian government, and any operating profit is transferred back to the government.

Regarding the law-suit itself, I think it is referring to the one brought forth by COMMITTEE FOR MONETARY AND ECONOMIC REFORM against the crown (and Bank of Canada). Having skimmed through the court files, it seems to be groundless: no where in the Bank of Canada Act does it require the BoC to make interest free loans.

It was dismissed by the initial judge, and on appeal the judge agreed that the suit is frivolous in its current form:

It's actually not quite that simple as far as I understand. Some parts were struck down but other parts won on appeals. COMER currently won the last round of the government's appeal of the appeals on Jan. 26th. Here is the lawyer representing COMER's explanation:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cgdyWPxLf1s#t=53

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's actually not quite that simple as far as I understand. Some parts were struck down but other parts won on appeals. COMER currently won the last round of the government's appeal of the appeals on Jan. 26th. Here is the lawyer representing COMER's explanation:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=cgdyWPxLf1s#t=53

That's not what the judgment in question said.

My understanding of where the case is:

COMER filed the suit back in 2011, the government sought to dismiss the suit, which in Aug 2013 a judge ruled against COMER, and struck down the suit without a chance to amend. On appeals in April 2014 Justice Russell maintained that the entire suit must be struck down, but granted COMER the chance to amend their claim. Contrary to what the plaintiff's lawyer said in the youtube clip, none of the original suit was allowed to proceed. The latest appeal upheld the April 2014 ruling, so at best they won the right to amend their claim.

Franking the suit is simply a waste of everyone's time. Besides the fact that mandating the BoC to make interest-free loan is a terrible idea (this effectively is saying that BoC must print money to support the government's needs regardless of economical situation), the Banking Act Bank of Canada Act never mentioned anything about interest-free loans.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...