affidavit to mr. gibson
DESCRIPTION
the demands ofTRANSCRIPT
AFFIDAVIT
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME
TO TAKE LEAVE TO APPEAL
I, ARLENE LOWERY, DO HEREBY MAKE OATH AND SAY AS FOLLOWS:
1. On November 23, 2010 I was notified by the Supreme Court of Canada
Registrar’s office that certain parties were not in receipt of the documents by
November 08, 2010.
2. Even though I had been on time filing with the Supreme Court of Canada
(hereby referred to as SCC) and had to my knowledge provided adequate
information as to the delays being in contact either directly or by email on
November 08, 2010, I should still file a Notice of Motion requesting an
Extension of Time to file a Notice of Motion to Take Leave to Appeal the
decision SKCA109CanLII to November 10, 2010.
3. This was requested of me, by telephone by Suzanne of the registrar’s office
since Ms. C. Clifford for the Respondents (Defendants) Chief Cal Johnston
and Corporal Debbie Ferguson and Mr. Cann, counsel for Dr. C. Norman,
Dr. S. Leibel and Dr. L.P. Ruthnum claimed they were not served the
written materials until November 10, 2010.
4. On November 08, 2010, either by delivery of written materials or by email all
parties were served. Exhibit A. are copies of the email sent to Ms. C. Clifford
for the Respondents (Defendants) Chief Cal Johnston and Corporal Debbie
Ferguson, Mr. Brian Gibson, counsel for the Attorney General of the
Government of Canada and Mr. Cann, counsel for Dr. C. Norman, Dr. S. Leibel
and Dr. L.P. Ruthnum.
5. Exhibit B. is the 4 page Affidavit of Service by Mr. Lowery with the exhibits/
attachments as listed therein.
6. On November 23, 2010 preparing the Notice of Motion to Extend Time to file, I
noted that not one member of the counsel team had returned the
Acknowledgment of Service provided to them with their written materials.
7. Mr. Gibson should have received his written materials after the November 11,
2010 holiday in the week following but to my knowledge had no difficulty with
this and had in fact received the email as documented in Exhibit A.
8. On November 23, 2010 after speaking with the registry I wanted to ensure that
the November 10, 2010 time-line was long enough for Mr. Gibson, knowing
that he would have received his written materials last, being that they were
mailed by regular post to his office in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan.
9. I left an urgent message for Mr. Gibson, which was returned by a gentleman by
the name of Michael Brennan.
10. I explained to Mr. Brennan the need to know when the materials were received
by their office, to determine the extension required, or if Mr. Gibson had a
problem with simply having November 10, 2010 as the extension date as I had
been directed to do.
11. Mr. Brennan indicated he would make some inquiries and get back to me.
12. Approximately 4:50 p.m. he telephoned me back.
13. He confirmed that Mr. Gibson was served the materials but that he did not think
that he needed to Acknowledge Service on him since the Attorney General of
the Government of Canada was not on the Style of Cause.
14. Mr. Gibson’s being served both on November 08th, 2010 by email (see Exhibit
A-page 1/3) and then the written materials; and his ignoring this and failing to
acknowledge service until I contacted his office on November 23, 2010 will
hopefully be taken into consideration regarding his client.
15. In addition, Mr. Gibson’ s client was represented at the Saskatchewan Court of
Appeal and I could not understand why he would not understand that his client
was still an integral part of this litigation at the Supreme Court of Canada phase.
16. This prompted me to write a 2 page letter dated November 23, 2010 (attached
as Exhibit C.) to the registry explaining my concerns in particular over the
accuracy of the Style of Cause and a question as to the need to request an
extension of time to Take Leave to at least November 23, 2010, being that Mr.
Brennan acknowledged that their office had been in receipt of the materials.
17. In the morning of Wednesday, November 24, 2010, a woman left me a message
by the name of Tracy Friesen.
18. She identified herself as Mr. Gibson’s assistant and indicated he was out of the
office until the end of the month and would attend to my concerns upon his
return.
19. I telephoned Ms. Friesen back after hearing her message and stressed the
urgency of the acknowledgment of having been served.
20. In my message I indicated that I had sent a 12 page facsimile yesterday
outlining what my concerns were.
21. Ms. Friesen left me another message after this indicating they only received a
one page blank sheet of paper with the name of our organization at the top.
22. November 24, 2010, I informed the registry of the SCC and counsel of Mr.
Gibson’s position and my concerns and a copy of this letter is attached as
Exhibit D. * I also telephoned the registry and left a message for Suzanne to let
her know I would file a motion for an extension as directed.
23. Ms. Clifford’s wrote me a note and sent it by fax letting me know that she did
not receive my email sent on November 08, 2010 (attached at Exhibit E.), that
her finally communicating this to myself, that I deemed I should proceed to
request a Notice of Motion for an Extension for her.
24. I have filed a Notice of Motion for an Extension to Take Leave as a formality,
with a date of November 10, 2010 or if need be a request for Mr. Gibson, an
extension of November 23, 2010, the date I received confirmation from Mr.
Gibson’s office that he/ they had received the written materials.
25. In conclusion: I point out to you the Style of Cause in my Application to Take
Leave had left the parties proposed off due to the directions which are on SCC
website’s Welcome Page for self-litigants and it states as per FORM 22
attached as Exhibit E.
26. In case Mr. Gibson or the registry of the SCC require that I change the Style of
Cause as it was in the Written Argument for the Appeal in the Saskatchewan
Court of Appeal I will do so upon notification from the registry office of the
Supreme court of Canada.
27. Ms. Joyce LaPrise and the Government of Canada are parties to this lawsuit as
Respondents (Defendants) as they were added on December 01, 2005.
28. This rationale for these 2 parties not only be added as proposed but added, is
because not one member of counsel filed an application to strike my Statement
of Claim (Amended Fresh Copy) filed on January 18, 2006 and noted at the
APPENDIX.
29. This position is central to my argument as per my MEMORANDUM.
An Acknowledgment of Service accompanies this application.
Dated at
Sworn before me in Regina, Saskatchewan, on this 26th
day of November, 2010.
__________________________________, __________________________
Commissioner of Oath ARLENE LOWERY A Commissioner for Oaths in and for Saskatchewan
My Commission expires _________, 20___.
Arlene Lowery, Applicant/Appellant (Plaintiff)
203-1808 Smith Street,
Regina, SK CAN S4P 2N4
Tel; (306) 205-4160
Fax: (306) 205-4161
E-mail: [email protected]
To Office of the Registrar: Fax: 613-996-9138
613-996-8666
1-888-551-1185
Supreme Court of Canada
301 Wellington Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0J1
Sent by facsimile with hardcopy and check of $75.00 to follow by registered mail
November 26, 2010.
AND TO:
Darryl Brown, Solicitor for the Attorney General, Saskatchewan Government
Saskatchewan Justice
Civil Law division
900-1874 Smith Street
Regina, SK, Canada
S4P 4B3
Telephone: (306) 787-8953
Fax number: (306) 787-581Email: [email protected]
And to all-----------