• TURMEL: Mozajko Reply in Supreme Court MedPot Leave Application

    From John KingofthePaupers Turmel@21:1/5 to All on Mon Nov 28 05:59:11 2022
    TURMEL: Mozajko Reply in Supreme Court MedPot Leave Application

    JCT: Igor Mozajko's Reply to the Crown Response was emailed
    to the Court and Crown today:

    Igor Mozajko

    VIA EMAIL

    Monday November 28, 2022
    Ms. Chantal Carbonneau, Registrar
    Supreme Court of Canada,
    301 Wellington Street
    Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0J1

    Dear Registrar:

    Re: MOZAJKO, Igor v His Majesty the King, File No. 40395

    Please accept this letter as the Reply of Igor Mozajko to
    the Response for the application for leave to appeal in this
    matter.

    The Respondent argued there was an:

    absence of pleaded facts capable of supporting a section
    7 infringement..

    Paragraph 35 lists 18 facts taken by justice Brown as
    proven.

    Respondent further argued:

    The applicant suggests the FCA decision is in conflict
    with Chaoulli v Quebec and Allard v Canada. However, he
    has identified no conflict between the FCA decision in
    this case,

    Chaoulli concluded that delays in obtaining medical
    treatment do cause harm to violate rights and the FCA
    concluded the Applicant was not harmed by 11 month delay.

    Respondent further argued:

    The proposed appeal does not raise an issue of public
    importance,

    Chaoulli established that delays in obtaining medical
    treatment do raise an issue of public important and over 300
    other plaintiffs about the delays in processing their
    permits add to the point.

    Respondent also argues:

    the ACMPR had been repealed, which rendered the
    requested declarations meaningless.

    The fact that the ACMPR has been replaced by a new regime
    does not make the damages suffered under the old regime
    meaningless.

    Respondent finally argues:

    these issues would be better addressed in a future case
    that has been properly pleaded and that is based on
    extant regulations rather than the former ACMPR.

    There is no reason to await a future case based on extant
    regulation rather than the ACMPR when the claimed damages
    were suffered under the old regulation.

    Dated at Dieppe New Brunswick Nov 28 2022.


    _____________________________________
    Applicant:
    Igor Mozajko

    Cc: Jon Bricker,
    Jon.Bricker@justice.gc.ca
    For the Respondent

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)