Page 5 of 5

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Fri Jun 11, 2010 8:00 pm
by Domspun
I received the legal advice, very promising! I will work on the translation over the weekend. It's pretty long.

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Sat Jun 12, 2010 3:35 am
by crushers
8-) :-D 8-)
Domspun wrote:I received the legal advice, very promising! I will work on the translation over the weekend. It's pretty long.

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:37 pm
by Domspun
Since everybody who tried to translate the legal advice failed, I did a short version. I will have to hire a professional translator if I want the documents translated in a reasonable delay. If anybody know a professional translator, send me a e-mail!

So here it is:


I.: This advice is concerning the use of Article 633.1 of the HSC for banning RHD cars and how it can be nullified.

II.: Governing law.

- A ministerial order have to be based on a law because a minister have no predefined legislative power.

- Ultra Vires doctrine
The minister exceeded the jurisdiction by overseeing the governing law. (hope I got that right!). The text in the box, is an example(precedent) of a case where this doctrine has been used. It was a clear case of power abuse from the municipality.

- Control of legality by judicial courts

Right of action in nullity by Articles 2,33,46 of the Code of Civil procedure. Link: http://www2.publicationsduquebec.gouv.q ... C25_A.html

Ministerial orders are not immune from judicial control. The text in the box is a case of the St/Mary's Indian Band against the Canada and it says that ministerial oders, if are exceeding their jurisdiction, are declared ultra vires.

- Jurisdiction forum: Superior Court

The Superior Court of Quebec have the power to proceed with an action in nullity.

Lot's of examples for delay, party's interest and burden of proof.

III. Application to our case

- In our dispute, we will need to prove that the security factor is not there and demonstrate that the decision of the ministerial order is motivated by other means.

- Minister of transport power discretion (!? is that right?)

Since the article 633.1 does not have any terms to qualify the risk factor, how can a decision be made on the 30% number from the study. Is 30% normal between two types of vehicles or is it exceptional. (From the statistics I got, 30% is nothing!)

- Dispute of the risk analysis

We will need an actuary to demonstrate the flaws of the study and make a countervaluation.

IV. Summary of conclusions

- We will need to show that the minister exceeded the jurisdiction by banning vehicles that are not a real risk "that endangers the safety of persons and property".

Original in french:



Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 11:08 am
by delicat
Thanks!

That's actually pretty a pretty good way to approach this case. Don't think anyone would have anything to say aside from "good job!"

And it's very nice that everybody's time and contributions are well used, thanks again for keeping us posted!

Cheers!
David

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 8:52 am
by Domspun
Next thing is a complete report from an actuary for discrediting the SAAQ study!

I am still searching for a translator. I could pay for one, but I think it is better to spend on the actuary and lawyer before paying for a translator.

If anybody know somebody who works as a translator and is willing to help, contact me.

Thanks everyone!

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Sun Jul 18, 2010 9:08 am
by RichD
Domspun wrote:If anybody know somebody who works as a translator and is willing to help, contact me.
I know some, in Montreal. They all charge for their service.

Sorry, my workload is at max until October.

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 9:44 am
by delicat
Hey guys,

This thread isn't dead! Last night at the meeting "Lucky Dad" donated two of his OEM L300 oil filters that quickly got snapped off by another member for $40.

I'm sending Lucky Dad's contribution to Domspun via paypal....

Thanks again!!!
Mr D.

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 12:18 pm
by solanoid
Hi,

A question... In the fillipines (Im told) they will convert rhd to lhd, if worst came to worst would this be an alternative to avoid the law man? what would something like that cost? :shock:

Aaron

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 6:40 pm
by FalcoColumbarius
solanoid wrote:Hi,

A question... In the fillipines (Im told) they will convert rhd to lhd, if worst came to worst would this be an alternative to avoid the law man? what would something like that cost? :shock:

Aaron
Would that not be like offering your butt to the lord of the land to hopefully persuade him not to exercise "jus primae noctis" with your new bride?

Falco.

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 7:30 pm
by RichD
Conversion would make for a great political statement, but it would not address the ban, which is related to the age and origin.

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Wed Nov 17, 2010 11:26 pm
by MardyDelica
you dont want to import Rhd to lhd vechiel from the phils as i see it mostly no heating
only cold ac lang
i see all this when i visit phil last month
cheers;

Re: MUST READ!

Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 8:06 am
by mararmeisto
solanoid wrote:Hi,

A question... In the fillipines (Im told) they will convert rhd to lhd, if worst came to worst would this be an alternative to avoid the law man? what would something like that cost? :shock:

Aaron
Look at this instead: http://www.delica.ca/forum/1994-hyundai ... -8083.html

And since your profile indicates you are in the Edmonton area, I wouldn't be worried about it - don't stoke CADA's fire by piling wood beside the pit.