Statement of Claim
Docket No: T-88-06
In the Federal court of Canada
Statement of Claim
To the Defendants:
A legal proceeding has been commenced against you by the Plaintiffs. The Claim made against you is set out in the following pages.
If you wish to defend the proceedings you or a solicitor acting for you are required to prepare a statement of defense in Form 17 B prescribed by the Federal Court's Rules, serve it on the Plaintiff's solicitor or where the Plaintiff does not have a solicitor, serve it on the plaintiff and file it with proof of service, at a local office of this Court within 30 days after the Statement of claim is served on you, if you are served within Canada.
If you are served in the United States of America, the period for serving and filing your statement of defense is forty days. If you are served outside Canada and the United States of American, the period for serving and filing your Statement of defense is sixty days.
Copies of the Federal Court Rules, information concerning the local offices of the Court and other necessary information may be obtained on request to the Administrator of the Court as Ottawa (telephone 613-992-4218) or at any local office.
If you fail to defend this proceeding, judgment may be given against you in your absence and without further notice to you.
Date: January 17, 2006
The plaintiffs claim they were wrongly charged that in March of 1996 and on several occasions thereafter they did export wheat or barley to the USA without a Canadian Wheat Board License thereby creating an alleged offence under Section 160 of the Canada Customs Act.
The Plaintiffs further claim that in March of 1996 and on several occasions thereafter that they were wrongly charged that they did export wheat or barley to the USA and did fail to report in writing to the Chief Officer of Canada Customs thereby creating an offence under Section 160 of the Canada Customs Act.
The Plaintiffs claim that the potential penalties for the alleged offences under section 160 of the Canada Customs Act are shown as %50,000.00 for each incident for 6 months incarceration of both of the Crown chose to proceed by way of a summary proceeding.
The Plaintiff's claim that the defendants caused the plaintiffs to be subjected to criminal proceedings for a period exceeding ten years when they knew from the beginning that the charges were unenforceable fabrications of bogus charges that were not known to law and did cause the Plaintiffs long term mental anguish, emotional pain, character defamation, abusive stress and financial hardship to the family members, that included the illegal seizure of money, grain trucks and personal property.
The Plaintiff Ralph Goodale, in his capacity as the minister responsible for the Canadian Wheat Board knew full well that the Plaintiffs were charged with offenses not known to law and did in May of 1996 obtain Royal Assent for an Order in Council that would serve to close the loop hole in the law under which the Plaintiffs had been wrongly charged.
The Plaintiffs claim possession of documents of a meeting held on the 23rd day of June 1997 at the Connaught Building in Ottawa attended by several Wheat Board Officials and several Customs Officials that clearly reveals the defendants and their officials knew full well that the requirement to report in writing to the Chief Officer of Customs was not a legal requirement and in accordance with the law.
The Plaintiffs further claim that Lorne Hehn in his capacity as Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Wheat Board did publicly report in the Western Producer on February 10, 1994, that the Canadian Wheat Board is helpless to stop with industry sources say is an increasing number of exports of wheat and barley into the USA and the Board can no longer enforce a provision of the Canadian Wheat Board Act requiring exporters of prairie grain to get a permit from the board. He stated further that the Canadian Wheat Board does not have a vehicle to properly enforce that law.
The Plaintiffs claim that the defendants devised an illegal strategy to obtain the assistance of David Anderson in his capacity as Minister responsible for the Canada Customs in an attempt to use the Customs Officials to us In House Directives that did not have the force of law to intimidate and abuse the rights of the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiffs claim that in spite of many substantial indicators showing the defendants that they were acting unlawfully they did continue to act with arrogance and with the aforethought thereby causing the plaintiffs to suffer these unless prosecutions for excess of ten years.
The Plaintiffs further claim that the actions of the Defendants constitute a violation of the very best of Democracy and the Rule of Law and as such action constitute a massive abuse of power.
The Plaintiffs claim that on May 2nd of 2005 the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal did order that the subject charges brought against the Plaintiffs were to be quashed and did thereby terminate the prosecutions in favour of the plaintiffs.
The Plaintiffs jointly claim that the decision of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal and the herein presented matters clearly show that the subject prosecutions lasting over a period of ten years fall squarely within the meaning of "malicious prosecutions".
The plaintiffs further claim the right to seek Summary Judgment of the grounds there is no defence to this claim.
Exemplary and Punitive Damages in the amount of $2,000,000.00 (two million dollars) for each of the herein named plaintiffs.
Dated at the City of Regina, the 17th day of January, 2006.