Thursday, 18 February 2016

227. DISMISSED BY "CONSENT" (?)

VIEWS@15210

My yesterday, February 17th request: 
ATTENTION JOHNNY VAN CAMP

DEAR MR VAN CAMP:  

When may I expect your version of the Reasons for Judgment? 

Sincerely, 

Jan Steen 
----------------------------------------------

This February 18, 2016
Dear Mr. Steen,

Further to your email below please find attached a copy of the Order Made After Application filed with the courts on February 15th.  An entered copy of the order will follow in due course.

Regards,
Counsel for the Attorney General of British Columbia          

(No Signature)===================================================================



NO. 15 4257 
VICTORIA REGISTRY 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 
BETWEEN: 
EVERT JAN STEEN 
PLAINTIFF 
AND: 

THE MINISTER OF JUSTICE AND 
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF BRITISH COLUMBIA 
DEFENDANTS 

ORDER MADE AFTER APPLICATION 

BEFORE   )    The lIonourable Mr. Justice Gaul         )    February 12, 2016 

ON THE APPLICATION of the plaintiff, Evert Jan Steen, coming on for hearing at 850 

Burdett Avenue, Victoria, British Columbia, on February 12, 2016, and on hearing Evert 

Jan Steen, appearing on his own behalf, and Johnny Van Camp, counsel for the  

defendants, The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of British Columbia; 

THIS COURT ORDERS that: 
 1The plaintiff's notice of civil claim filed November 3, 2015, is struck; 
 2. The action is dismissed; 

------------------------------------------------------   (Page 2 break)
                   
3. The plaintiff shall pay $100 to the defendants for their costs in defending the action; and
4. The plaintiff's signature approving the form of this order is unnecessary.  

THE FOLLOWING PARTIES APPROVE THE FORM OF THIS ORDER AND CONSENT TO EACH OF THE ORDERS, IF ANY, THAT ARE INDICATED ABOVE 
AS BEING BY CONSENT: 


(Initialed by JVCamp)
_____________________________
Johnny Van Camp
Counsel for The Minister of Justice and
Attorney General of British Columbia


By the Court

___________________
Registrar
-----------------------------------       (Page 3 break)


(STAMP SHOWNG AN OVAL WITH:)       
  VICTORIA
FILED

 FEB 15 2016

REGISTRY 

I just spent an hour, to no avail,  trying to UPLOAD THE ACTUAL STAMP.
My QUESTION?  WHAT IS THE STAMP DOING ON AN EMPTY PAGE?

NOTE:
Several, to me, huge issues:
1. "The plaintiff's notice of civil claim filed November 3, 2015," (above)

YES, I originally 'filed' the claim on November 3, 2015.
But I then ADJOURNED the claim via the filing of a Requisition, dated November 16th
Registry stamped  November 17, 2015. (below)  It was stamped the next day: NOV.17,2015 
=============================================================
No: 154257 
Registry: Victoria 

In the Supreme Court of British Columbia 

Between: Evert Jan Steen 

Plaintiff 

AND 

The Ministry of Justice/ Attorney General of British Columbia 

Defendant 

REQUISITION 

Filed by: Evert Jan Steen (Self Representing Plaintiff) 

Based on jurisdiction and time-line reasoning, allowing for defendant's response, the request by the Plaintiff to adjourn the Notice of Application as per filed on November 3, 2015, with the present set date of November 27th, 2015, date for Summary Trial 

and reschedule it for: February 12, 2016. 

Please Note the Defendant has NOT been served any files! 

The application be heard by a Judge with a 2 HOUR maximum time requested. 


Dated this Monday, November 16th, 2015 -  
(MY SIGNATURE)
  
______________________________           
EVERT JAN STEEN
Address of Applicant: 
ENTERED

BC, VORIZ0 

TEL: 250-blah/blah


Order granted: . 

Or 

Application denied: .................. 

Date: .................... 
________________________
Judge of the Supreme Court 
=====================================================================

"Please Note the Defendant has NOT been served any files!"
THIS was a prerequisite made by the Registry! I could adjourn via filing a Requisition, but had to indicate I hadn't "served" my documents yet. Based on all the action, it is clear by the various indications of the Court, they were in possession of, as well as USED the NOVEMBER 03 FILED documents.; documents filed, but not SERVED on them.

I spent MANY hours redoing my files, clearly to NO avail! I spent money, went to Courtenay to have the new documents with my affidavit sworn, witnessed, and date stamped; paid the Courtenay Registry $24.00; sent the 2 bundled Copies of each, one to the Registry in Victoria, one to Care of Johnny Van Camp at the Ministry, by Registered Mail @ $12.00 each. I tracked all down to see they were delivered on Friday February 5, 2016. 

WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THOSE DOCS AND EFFORT ?
================================================================
(No.3) Then there is my paying them $100...for their costs??
(No.4) And they do not need my 'signature?' It is "UNNECESSARY"?

SURELY THIS IS A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE, A DISGRACE OF IMMEASURABLE PROPORTION; A CIRQUE DE DIABLE! I call it criminal behaviour! Democracy my foot!

So there it is! Awaiting the transcripts now, already paid upfront @ $430.00
CURIOUS TO NOTE if there has been any tampering with what I remember the conversations to have been.

I have learned one major lesson here! YOU CANNOT FIGHT THIS BEAST! YOU WILL GO CRAZY. They can do ANYTHING they like; WOE to you if you are caught at any omission. THE ONLY WAY IS TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYONE PREPARED TO LISTEN AT THE EXTREME TOP. 

Lastly, the tech part of doing this blog is becoming more cumbersome. It doesn't want to show signatures, and date stamps; PDF copies are nigh impossible to reproduce without buying in to the supplier's allowances. (i.e. Acrobat Reader) 







No comments:

Post a Comment

Post a Comment