SUBMIT A COMPLAINT

Justice Neena Sharma Supreme Court Lacks Intelligence of Judgejustice neena sharma supreme court dumbest canadian judge

1
R Oct 09, 2018 Review updated:

Justice Neena Sharma Supreme Court

Foolish Decisions Made By A Judge who lacks education

The association and the city, which provided some funding for the program, appealed that ruling to the B.C. Court of Appeal.

On Wednesday, George Cadman, a lawyer for the association, told a three-judge panel of the province's highest court that Justice Neena Sharma had made a number of errors, including her use of a legal test for discrimination.

Cadman said it was proven at the tribunal that certain actions of the ambassadors were adverse and that there is a disproportionate number of people within the homeless population who are protected under the B.C. Human Rights Code.

But, he argued, the evidence didn't prove that the ambassadors were in some way acting in a discriminatory manner: "They were essentially doing their jobs as described regardless of a person's race, colour or ancestry."

The appeal hearing, before Justices Harvey Groberman, David Harris and Lauri Ann Fenlon, is expected to finish Thursday.

The ambassadors began by patrolling the streets to assist and greet potential customers, but also attempting to do some crime prevention. VANDU alleged that the ambassadors woke up people sleeping on the street, patrolled alleyways to prevent the homeless from searching garbage bins and even photographed some people.

This Judge is the noted as the dumbest Judge in Canada

Responses

  • Mo
    Mohd Ali Hirji Apr 01, 2019

    Mohd Ali Hirji a 74-year-old Canadian Citizen a pensioner has challenged the integrity of the Supreme Court of Canada the Highest Court of Canada, and the integrity of Canadian courts in the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva Switzerland. Hirjis publicly condemns and opposes the lawless acts unlawfully and willfully committed by the Canadian Courts against them.

    The Hirjis have refused to comply with void court orders passed by trial judge Madam Justice Sharma which were based on "falsified findings of facts" in the Reasons for Judgement rendered on November 6, 2015. Madam Justice Sharma committed one of the most serious criminal acts in violation of Criminal Code s. 139 "any judge that willfully commits and jeopardized his/her secured carrier by "Falsifying the Facts" in Reasons for Judgement by taking advantage and abusing the trusted judicial office is punishable in law by removal of the judge from the office and possible jail sentence of up to 10 years". These lawless acts, atrocities, cruelty, and injustices committed by the trial judge on the Hirjis were willfully upheld and aided by the Court of Appeal Judges Madam justice Newbury, Mr. justice Ian T. Donald, Madam Justice Mary E. Saunders, and madam justice Elizabeth A. Bennett.

    Furthermore, these criminal acts committed by the lower court judges are willfully supported and approved by the Supreme Court of Canada judges Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C.Chief Justice of Canada, Honourable Justice Russell Brown, Honourable Justice Clément Gascon, Honourable Justice Suzanne Côté, Honourable Justice Malcolm Rowe, Honourable Justice Andromache Karakatsanis, Honourable justice Rosalie Silberman Abella, Honourable Justice Michael J. Moldaver, Honourable Justice Richard Wagner. The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the invalid, void and unenforceable court orders in law to willfully deny justice to the Hirjis and make them homeless unlawfully abusing their judicial offices for the purpose other than the public good.

    These are extremely serious and explosive charges against the fourteen Canadian judicial officers supported by facts, pieces of evidence and court records as presented by Hirji in his case. However, to this day none of the judicial officers named in the petition have defended or repudiated these claims by the Hirjis simply because based on the evidence it can not be justified under the law by the judicial officers of the Court.

    On April 7, 2015, Hirjis appeared before the Supreme Court of British Columbia in a 25 days trial in front of trial judge Madam Justice Sharma. Hirji proved their burden of proof and their case with cogent evidence at the trial. However; Madam Justice Sharma willfully "falsified the facts" in reasons for her Judgment on November 6, 2015, and committed one of the most serious criminal act in violation of criminal code s. 139 that any judge would willingly commit. Such an offense is punishable in law by removal of the judge from the office and possible jail sentence of up to 10 years. The Hirjis repeatedly brought the falsified facts to the attention of the trial judge Madam Justice Sharma before the order was sealed and requested Madam Justice Sharma to correct the "Falsified facts" that results in "Miscarriage of Justice". Madam Justice Sharma unlawfully refused/ ignored to correct the "Falsified Facts" with the full knowledge of the consequences of "falsified facts" and willfully denied justice to the Hirjis. The court issued orders that amount to over $900, 000 in favor of the defendants based on the "falsified facts" that would unlawfully strip down the Hirjis of their lives savings and their home. It allowed the defendants and their insurers to put the charge on Hirjis home that would make them homeless. FOR FURTHER DETAILS SEE WWW.MOHDALIHIRJI.COM AND https://www.thepetitionsite.com/749/786/165/public-disclosure-by-the-aga-khan/

    5 Votes
  • Mo
    Mohd Ali Hirji Jun 19, 2019

    Mohd Ali Hirji and Parin Mohd Ali Hirji Lalani
    1084 Lillooet Road,
    North Vancouver,
    British Columbia V7j 2H8.
    Canada.
    Email: [email protected]
    Email: [email protected]
    Website: http://www.mohdhirji.com
    TEL: (604) 985-9383
    ___________________________________________________________________________________
    The Honourable David Lametti
    Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
    284 Wellington Street
    Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8
    Email: [email protected]
    _______________________________________________________________

    Petitions Team
    [email protected]
    Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
    United Nations Office at Geneva
    1211 Geneva 10 (Switzerland)
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    Dear Honourable Minister Mr. David Lametti.

    The Hirjis are humbly requesting and bringing to the Ministers attention the violations of Hirjis Human Rights and Constitutional Rights “willfully violated” by the State Courts since 2015 due to the failures of the Canadian courts to uphold the rule of law and render justice and where the judges have failed to perform their judicial function and follow the law or has acted in a manner in which the general public would believe to be wrong based on the evidence in the court registries. This is in violations of Hirjis’ Constitutional Rights and also constitutes violations of Hirjis rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its First Optional Protocol. The Court of Appeal of British Columbia and the Supreme Court of Canada has failed to address the issues that never existed at the trial or in trial records that are inadmissible as evidence in law and have failed to provide a reasoned judgement or address the falsified “findings of material facts” in reason for Judgement that unlawfully changed the course of this litigation in favor the defendants and their Insurers. Had the trial court, or the Court of Appeal of B.C or the Supreme Court of Canada had fulfilled their judicial functions and carried out their judicial duties impartially and upheld the rule of law and struck off the inadmissible evidence of the defendants as required by law and not violated the plaintiffs Charter of Rights and Freedom ss. 7, 11 (d), and s.15 as well as Hirjis human rights that are enshrined in International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its First Optional Protocol and under the covenants in Article 2(3), Article 6, Article 9, Article 14, Article 16, and Article 26 than the plaintiffs would not have suffered enormous damages amounting to tens of millions of dollars based on the evidence at the hands of the courts nor would they have been placed in this position by the breaches of the State’s courts.

    Please find the attached details of the response to the defendants' application that is self-explanatory. Based on the rule of law the orders of the Supreme Court of Canada that are null and void and are unenforceable in law. The willful refusal of the judicial officers of Supreme Court of Canada to follow their own rulings in landmark cases such as R. v. S. (R. D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484, and Wewaykum Indian Band v Canada, 2003 SCC 45 (CanLII), [2003] SCJ No 50, [2003] 2 SCR 259. This calls into question the impartiality of the highest Court of the land and its members and raises doubt on the public's perception of the Court's ability to render Justice according to law.
    This issue of national importance before the Minister is one of those issues that put the integrity of entire Administration of Justice, and entire Canadian system of Justice and all the judicial officers of the State as Guardians of the Justice system on trial. It puts on trial, the ability of the judicial officers of the State courts as Guardians of the Canadian Justice system and the Court's ability to render Justice according to law of the land and uphold the Constitution. It puts on trial the credibility of the judicial officers of the State courts and honor their oath of office and pledge to protect the constitution and uphold the rule of law and render Justice impartially according to the law in this case based on the evidence and the Rule of law of the land without fear or favor regardless of the status of the perpetrators and hold them accountable for their failures and unlawful acts that brings the integrity of entire administration Justice into disrepute and raises doubt on the public's perception of the Court's ability to render Justice according to the law and destroying the lives of the litigants by the most trusted judicial officers of the court.

    The Hirjis have been persecuted by the judicial officers of the Canadian Courts unlawfully and willfully from 2015 to this day and have been deprived of remedies till now for the crimes that the Hirjis did not commit. These lawless acts willfully committed by the judicial officers of the State courts to willfully “Obstruct the course Justice” and willfully violate the Hirjis Charter and human rights and illegally strip them down of all their assets and their property is no less evil then the crimes and criminal acts committed by the judicial officers of the court against the victims of the World War II that can neither be justified nor can it be defended nor can it be argued successfully by the judicial officers of the Canadian courts in any International Court of Law or in any competent Court of law in the world in view of the undisputed evidence in the court records.

    Hirjis humbly requests the Honourable Minister Mr. David Lametti not to ignore this issue of “Miscarriage of Justice” willfully imposed by the Canadian courts as ignored by the Ex-Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice Ms. Judy Wilson Raybould. We pray that the Minister will take into consideration the seriousness and the negative impact this can have on the Canadian civil and law-abiding citizens and the Government’s ability to govern and the legal Institution’s ability to render justice impartially and uphold the rule of the law. We request the Minister to take appropriate steps or take appropriate steps to advise the government to inquire into the failures of the Canadian courts to uphold the rule of the law and the constitution and remedy this “Miscarriage of Justice” willfully imposed by the Canadian courts on the Hirjis. We will forward you the outcome of the hearing on June 24, 2019 for your further consideration.

    Kindly acknowledge receipt of this email.

    Yours Sincerely

    Mohd Ali Hirji.

    C.c United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
    C.c The Honourable Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1I7KcN5eSK_WDqbTUJuOmKadfDhRuo7HW

    1 Votes
  • Ha
    Harry H Lee Aug 19, 2019

    Justice Sharma is a complete dumb ass really stupid and on a power trip
    and if you review all her cases you will note she falsifies facts and has gotten away with it because none of you have challenged her.

    What you should do stop complaining and file a complaint with Ottawa for her conduct which appears to be foolish and she should be removed from the bench.

    Only reason she is sitting as a judge is because there is a shortage of judges and they could not find anyone else. I work in one of the judges chambers and Justice Neena Sharma is regarded as one of the most incompetent judges in the Supreme Court of Canada

    Sitting in the barrister lounge you hear everything and both the lawyers and the judges believe she is a wacko and has the same IQ as Donald Trump.

    If you believe a judge’s conduct was improper, either during your case or in public, consider making a complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council.

    File a complaint about this dumb judge at:

    Canadian Judicial Council
    Ottawa, Ontario
    K1A 0W8

    tel. (613) 288-1566; fax (613) 288-1575

    4 Votes
  • Ha
    Harry H Lee Aug 19, 2019

    Butt Ugly Judge Neena Sharma falsifies facts

    3 Votes
  • I remember this judge in University she was the biggest slut on campus and married some innocent guy whop has no idea about her past.

    Justice Neana Sharma, Supreme Court She used to sleep around with the prosecutors and got her chance to become a judge because there were not enough judges at the time she won the gold and so stupid during all of her trials that if you read the transcripts you will find out her senses are really not very sensible

    Justice Neana Sharma, Supreme Court she is the biggest slut in Supreme Court and wonder if her poor husband knows she liked it up her ass, no actually she loved getting pumped up her ass and was a anal sex lover.

    So if you lawyers ever want to win in court just give it up her back side and oh she loves to swallow I speak from experience the woman is ugly and short but a slut all the way to the Supreme court

    Justice Neena Sharma Supreme Court Lacks Intelligence of Judge — justice neena sharma supreme court dumbest canadian judge
    1 Review updated: Aug 19, 2019
    4 comments
    Justice Neena Sharma Supreme Court

    Foolish Decisions Made By A Judge who lacks education

    The association and the city, which provided some funding for the program, appealed that ruling to the B.C. Court of Appeal.

    On Wednesday, George Cadman, a lawyer for the association, told a three-judge panel of the province's highest court that Justice Neena Sharma had made a number of errors, including her use of a legal test for discrimination.

    Cadman said it was proven at the tribunal that certain actions of the ambassadors were adverse and that there is a disproportionate number of people within the homeless population who are protected under the B.C. Human Rights Code.

    But, he argued, the evidence didn't prove that the ambassadors were in some way acting in a discriminatory manner: "They were essentially doing their jobs as described regardless of a person's race, colour or ancestry."

    The appeal hearing, before Justices Harvey Groberman, David Harris and Lauri Ann Fenlon, is expected to finish Thursday.

    The ambassadors began by patrolling the streets to assist and greet potential customers, but also attempting to do some crime prevention. VANDU alleged that the ambassadors woke up people sleeping on the street, patrolled alleyways to prevent the homeless from searching garbage bins and even photographed some people.

    This Judge is the noted as the dumbest Judge in Canada

    Ro Royason Oct 09, 2018
    Sort by: UpDate | Rating
    Comments
    Mo Mohd Ali Hirji Apr 01, 2019
    Best Best Advice
    Mohd Ali Hirji a 74-year-old Canadian Citizen a pensioner has challenged the integrity of the Supreme Court of Canada the Highest Court of Canada, and the integrity of Canadian courts in the United Nations Human Rights Commission in Geneva Switzerland. Hirjis publicly condemns and opposes the lawless acts unlawfully and willfully committed by the Canadian Courts against them.

    The Hirjis have refused to comply with void court orders passed by trial judge Madam Justice Sharma which were based on "falsified findings of facts" in the Reasons for Judgement rendered on November 6, 2015. Madam Justice Sharma committed one of the most serious criminal acts in violation of Criminal Code s. 139 "any judge that willfully commits and jeopardized his/her secured carrier by "Falsifying the Facts" in Reasons for Judgement by taking advantage and abusing the trusted judicial office is punishable in law by removal of the judge from the office and possible jail sentence of up to 10 years". These lawless acts, atrocities, cruelty, and injustices committed by the trial judge on the Hirjis were willfully upheld and aided by the Court of Appeal Judges Madam justice Newbury, Mr. justice Ian T. Donald, Madam Justice Mary E. Saunders, and madam justice Elizabeth A. Bennett.

    Furthermore, these criminal acts committed by the lower court judges are willfully supported and approved by the Supreme Court of Canada judges Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C.Chief Justice of Canada, Honourable Justice Russell Brown, Honourable Justice Clément Gascon, Honourable Justice Suzanne Côté, Honourable Justice Malcolm Rowe, Honourable Justice Andromache Karakatsanis, Honourable justice Rosalie Silberman Abella, Honourable Justice Michael J. Moldaver, Honourable Justice Richard Wagner. The Supreme Court of Canada upheld the invalid, void and unenforceable court orders in law to willfully deny justice to the Hirjis and make them homeless unlawfully abusing their judicial offices for the purpose other than the public good.

    These are extremely serious and explosive charges against the fourteen Canadian judicial officers supported by facts, pieces of evidence and court records as presented by Hirji in his case. However, to this day none of the judicial officers named in the petition have defended or repudiated these claims by the Hirjis simply because based on the evidence it can not be justified under the law by the judicial officers of the Court.

    On April 7, 2015, Hirjis appeared before the Supreme Court of British Columbia in a 25 days trial in front of trial judge Madam Justice Sharma. Hirji proved their burden of proof and their case with cogent evidence at the trial. However; Madam Justice Sharma willfully "falsified the facts" in reasons for her Judgment on November 6, 2015, and committed one of the most serious criminal act in violation of criminal code s. 139 that any judge would willingly commit. Such an offense is punishable in law by removal of the judge from the office and possible jail sentence of up to 10 years. The Hirjis repeatedly brought the falsified facts to the attention of the trial judge Madam Justice Sharma before the order was sealed and requested Madam Justice Sharma to correct the "Falsified facts" that results in "Miscarriage of Justice". Madam Justice Sharma unlawfully refused/ ignored to correct the "Falsified Facts" with the full knowledge of the consequences of "falsified facts" and willfully denied justice to the Hirjis. The court issued orders that amount to over $900, 000 in favor of the defendants based on the "falsified facts" that would unlawfully strip down the Hirjis of their lives savings and their home. It allowed the defendants and their insurers to put the charge on Hirjis home that would make them homeless. FOR FURTHER DETAILS SEE WWW.MOHDALIHIRJI.COM AND https://www.thepetitionsite.com/749/786/165/public-disclosure-by-the-aga-khan/

    Reply
    +4 Votes
    Mo Mohd Ali Hirji Jun 19, 2019
    Mohd Ali Hirji and Parin Mohd Ali Hirji Lalani
    1084 Lillooet Road,
    North Vancouver,
    British Columbia V7j 2H8.
    Canada.
    Email: [protected]@shaw.ca
    Email: parin.[protected]@hotmail.com
    Website: http://www.mohdhirji.com
    TEL: [protected]
    ___________________________________________________________________________________
    The Honourable David Lametti
    Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada
    284 Wellington Street
    Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H8
    Email: [protected]@justice.gc.ca
    _______________________________________________________________

    Petitions Team
    [protected]@ohchr.org
    Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
    United Nations Office at Geneva
    1211 Geneva 10 (Switzerland)
    ____________________________________________________________________________________

    Dear Honourable Minister Mr. David Lametti.

    The Hirjis are humbly requesting and bringing to the Ministers attention the violations of Hirjis Human Rights and Constitutional Rights “willfully violated” by the State Courts since 2015 due to the failures of the Canadian courts to uphold the rule of law and render justice and where the judges have failed to perform their judicial function and follow the law or has acted in a manner in which the general public would believe to be wrong based on the evidence in the court registries. This is in violations of Hirjis’ Constitutional Rights and also constitutes violations of Hirjis rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its First Optional Protocol. The Court of Appeal of British Columbia and the Supreme Court of Canada has failed to address the issues that never existed at the trial or in trial records that are inadmissible as evidence in law and have failed to provide a reasoned judgement or address the falsified “findings of material facts” in reason for Judgement that unlawfully changed the course of this litigation in favor the defendants and their Insurers. Had the trial court, or the Court of Appeal of B.C or the Supreme Court of Canada had fulfilled their judicial functions and carried out their judicial duties impartially and upheld the rule of law and struck off the inadmissible evidence of the defendants as required by law and not violated the plaintiffs Charter of Rights and Freedom ss. 7, 11 (d), and s.15 as well as Hirjis human rights that are enshrined in International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and its First Optional Protocol and under the covenants in Article 2(3), Article 6, Article 9, Article 14, Article 16, and Article 26 than the plaintiffs would not have suffered enormous damages amounting to tens of millions of dollars based on the evidence at the hands of the courts nor would they have been placed in this position by the breaches of the State’s courts.

    Please find the attached details of the response to the defendants' application that is self-explanatory. Based on the rule of law the orders of the Supreme Court of Canada that are null and void and are unenforceable in law. The willful refusal of the judicial officers of Supreme Court of Canada to follow their own rulings in landmark cases such as R. v. S. (R. D.), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 484, and Wewaykum Indian Band v Canada, 2003 SCC 45 (CanLII), [2003] SCJ No 50, [2003] 2 SCR 259. This calls into question the impartiality of the highest Court of the land and its members and raises doubt on the public's perception of the Court's ability to render Justice according to law.
    This issue of national importance before the Minister is one of those issues that put the integrity of entire Administration of Justice, and entire Canadian system of Justice and all the judicial officers of the State as Guardians of the Justice system on trial. It puts on trial, the ability of the judicial officers of the State courts as Guardians of the Canadian Justice system and the Court's ability to render Justice according to law of the land and uphold the Constitution. It puts on trial the credibility of the judicial officers of the State courts and honor their oath of office and pledge to protect the constitution and uphold the rule of law and render Justice impartially according to the law in this case based on the evidence and the Rule of law of the land without fear or favor regardless of the status of the perpetrators and hold them accountable for their failures and unlawful acts that brings the integrity of entire administration Justice into disrepute and raises doubt on the public's perception of the Court's ability to render Justice according to the law and destroying the lives of the litigants by the most trusted judicial officers of the court.

    The Hirjis have been persecuted by the judicial officers of the Canadian Courts unlawfully and willfully from 2015 to this day and have been deprived of remedies till now for the crimes that the Hirjis did not commit. These lawless acts willfully committed by the judicial officers of the State courts to willfully “Obstruct the course Justice” and willfully violate the Hirjis Charter and human rights and illegally strip them down of all their assets and their property is no less evil then the crimes and criminal acts committed by the judicial officers of the court against the victims of the World War II that can neither be justified nor can it be defended nor can it be argued successfully by the judicial officers of the Canadian courts in any International Court of Law or in any competent Court of law in the world in view of the undisputed evidence in the court records.

    Hirjis humbly requests the Honourable Minister Mr. David Lametti not to ignore this issue of “Miscarriage of Justice” willfully imposed by the Canadian courts as ignored by the Ex-Attorney General of Canada and Minister of Justice Ms. Judy Wilson Raybould. We pray that the Minister will take into consideration the seriousness and the negative impact this can have on the Canadian civil and law-abiding citizens and the Government’s ability to govern and the legal Institution’s ability to render justice impartially and uphold the rule of the law. We request the Minister to take appropriate steps or take appropriate steps to advise the government to inquire into the failures of the Canadian courts to uphold the rule of the law and the constitution and remedy this “Miscarriage of Justice” willfully imposed by the Canadian courts on the Hirjis. We will forward you the outcome of the hearing on June 24, 2019 for your further consideration.

    Kindly acknowledge receipt of this email.

    Yours Sincerely

    Mohd Ali Hirji.

    C.c United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights
    C.c The Honourable Prime Minister Justin Trudeau
    https://drive.google.com/open?id=1I7KcN5eSK_WDqbTUJuOmKadfDhRuo7HW

    Reply
    +1 Votes
    Ha Harry H Lee Aug 19, 2019
    Justice Sharma is a complete [censored] really stupid and on a power trip
    and if you review all her cases you will note she falsifies facts and has gotten away with it because none of you have challenged her.

    What you should do stop complaining and file a complaint with Ottawa for her conduct which appears to be foolish and she should be removed from the bench.

    Only reason she is sitting as a judge is because there is a shortage of judges and they could not find anyone else. I work in one of the judges chambers and Justice Neena Sharma is regarded as one of the most incompetent judges in the Supreme Court of Canada

    Sitting in the barrister lounge you hear everything and both the lawyers and the judges believe she is a wacko and has the same IQ as Donald Trump.

    If you believe a judge’s conduct was improper, either during your case or in public, consider making a complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council.

    File a complaint about this dumb judge at:

    Canadian Judicial Council
    Ottawa, Ontario
    K1A 0W8

    tel. [protected]; fax [protected]

    Reply
    +1 Votes
    Ha Harry H Lee Aug 19, 2019
    Butt Ugly Judge Neena Sharma falsifies facts

    2 Votes
  • Mo
    Mohd Ali Hirji Oct 17, 2019

    The trial judge Justice Neana Sharma's decision rendered on November 6, 2015, that is based on inadmissible evidence that neither existed nor exist in the court records, that unenforceable in law and is null and void. The court of Appeal of British Columbia and the Supreme court of Canada have validated the void orders of the trial judge and have over exceeded their jurisdiction that is challenged by the plaintiffs who are self-represented litigants. The plaintiffs have issued a challenge to the defense counsels to end this litigation one way or the other and for the Honourable judge to arrive at and make an informed decision and have requested the court to address this issue of void orders impartially on October 22, 2019, based on the evidence and the rule of law.

    FALSIFIED EVIDENCE OF DEFENSE WITNESS MS. LYN CAMPBELL THAT NEVER EXISTED NOR EXISTS IN THE COURT RECORDS.

    50. On May 4, 2015 at the trial the defense witness Ex-strata manager Ms. Lyn Campbell, Strata Manager Mr. George Alexandru, and the defense counsel Mr. Alex Eged intentionally and illegally concocted the following evidence to derail the judicial machinery and defraud the plaintiffs out of their legitimate claim for damages.

    51. On pages 42 and 43 of the court transcript, Ms. Lyn Campbell testified under oath and describes how the paper flow is handled at VCS that never existed at VCS nor exists it the court records. Ms. Lyn Campbell describes the procedures of how the paper flow is handled by the front desk clerk at the law offices of Mr. Alex Aged.

    42
    Lynlaeh Campbell (for Defendants)
    In chief by Mr. Eged

    23 Q All right. Now, I want to talk to you a little bit
    24 about Vancouver Condominium Services' paper flow --
    25 A Okay.
    26 Q -- okay? And, in particular, I'd like you to tell
    27 Her Ladyship how Vancouver Condominium Services
    28 handled paperwork that was brought to the office by
    29 an owner of one of the stratas that it was
    30 managing.
    31 A Okay. It would come in. It was always date
    32 stamped and the clerks at the front desk would
    33 always ensure that there was a -- the strata plan
    34 was on there. Then it would be put in a folder to
    35 be given to the property manager, and then that
    36 correspondence was added to the agenda for the next
    37 council meeting and put on the agenda. So
    38 everything was definitely date stamped and recorded
    39 coming into the office.
    40 Q Okay. I'm going to ask you to turn to Exhibit 6 in
    41 that binder in front of you please, Ms. Campbell.
    42 Okay. Have a look at that document, ma'am. You
    43 can see it says at the bottom, "Urgent" by hand,
    44 "Attention: Ms. Campbell"?
    45 A Yes.
    46 Q Okay. And you've seen this before; correct?
    47 A In the binders that you gave me, yes.

    43
    Lynlaeh Campbell (for Defendants)
    In chief by Mr. Eged

    1 Q Yes. And do you have any recollection of seeing
    2 this on -- on or near the date indicated on the
    3 document of October 6th, 2000?
    4 A No.
    5 Q Does it bear the stamp that you would expect to --
    6 this document to bear if that had been delivered?
    7 A No.
    8 Q Do you recall ever dealing with Mr. Hirji in
    9 respect of his desire to rent out either whole or
    10 part of his unit?
    11 A No, I don't.
    12 Q Do you recall if this document made it into a
    13 folder that you've described as property manager
    14 for this condominium, and later into the minutes?
    15 A No.
    16 Q Do you recall any discussions with Mr. Hirji
    17 regarding renting to students?
    18 A No.
    19 Q Based on the look of this document and your
    20 recollection about it, could you say whether or not
    21 you received it?
    22 A I could not, no. It's ...

    52. The following evidence of the defense counsel in his Affidavit indisputably establishes the defendants’ premeditated intention to deliberately and recklessly derail the judicial machinery itself. The legal counsels engaged in counseling the defense witness in committing prohibited acts, of deceit, and fraud, with intent to obstruct, pervert and defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding that they knew will harm the plaintiffs and will defraud the plaintiffs out of their legitimate claim for damage, and make them homeless for the crimes they did not commit.

    53. The defendants procured the judgment against the plaintiffs by Fraud, and Fraud upon the court, by “obstructing the course of justice”. This fraud upon the court is established by the defendants' own evidence and fabricated and undisputable evidence and facts in the defense counsel's submissions and affidavits.

    54. Mr. Eged in his affidavit # 8 filed on November 23, 2015 confirms the following at paragraph 37:

    “I had considered an amount of $5, 000 for the plaintiffs claim for loss of rental income, that being $100 per month, for eight months a year from February 2005 to July 2010. In my view, this figure represented a reasonable reduction for not having access to a deck on a bedroom rented for $800 per month, during which time the evidence was that the plaintiffs took no steps to mitigate their loss.”

    THE PLAINTIFFS ARE ISSUING THE FOLLOWING CHALLENGE TO THE DEFENSE COUNSEL FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE HONORABLE JUDGE THAT CAN LEAVE NO REASONABLE DOUBT IN THE MIND OF THE JUDGE TO REACH AN INFORMED DECISION ON OCTOBER 22, 2019.

    2. The plaintiffs are issuing the following challenge to the defendants to end this litigation one way or the other at the hearing on October 22, 2019. The plaintiffs are issuing this challenge to the Defense counsels to produce the proof and the evidence of the existence of evidence of single written complaint submitted by the owners that is date stamped by the front desk Clark in the court records as testified by the defense witnesses (not the telephone complaint of the owners prepared by VCS agents).

    3. The plaintiffs throughout the litigation in Supreme Court of B. C action # S070817 have claimed that the strict policy of date Stamping the owners complaints at offices of the defendants property management agent Vancouver Condominium Services (“VCS”) at the relevant time during 2001 and 2015 never existed either at VCS nor exists in a single document entered into the evidence at the trial that can substantiate the testimonies of defense witnesses Ms. Lyn Campbell and Mr. George Alexandru under oath led by the defense counsels on May 4, 2015 in supreme court of B. C. action # S070817.

    4. The plaintiffs throughout the litigation have claimed in their applications and affidavits that the trial judge’s almost entire reasons for judgment are based on false testimonies of these two defense witnesses as evidence by the court record. The defense witnesses, as well as the defense counsel, knew that their evidence and the testimonies they are submitting under oath is false and untrue and neither existed at VCS nor does it exists in the court records and constitutes “Fraud upon the Court”.

    5. These claims by the plaintiffs of false and fabricated and concocted testimonies by the defendants and the defense counsels have not been repudiated or negated once in any court hearing or in any of the defendants’ affidavits.

    6. The burden of proof shifts on the defendants to negate these extremely serious claims of concocting the evidence at the trial and counselling the defense witnesses to commit prohibited acts and submitting the false testimonies in a judicial proceedings that they knew to be false and untrue and never existed at the VCS nor does it exists in any of the court records that constitute fraud upon the court.

    In Gaebel v. Lipka, 2017 BCCA 432 the court states at para 25

    [25] The trial judge’s task was to determine whether or not the accident was caused by the driver’s negligence. In her reasons, the trial judge cites Fontaine v. British Columbia (Official Administrator), 1998 CanLII 814 (SCC), [1998] 1 S.C.R. 424, for the proposition that a plaintiff cannot succeed in establishing negligence for an accident by relying on the collision itself as proof that the defendant had breached the standard of care. With respect, that statement does not accurately capture the test established in Fontaine. The test arising from Fontaine was set out by this Court in Nason v. Nunes, 2008 BCCA 203 (CanLII):

    [8] … Instead, the Court provided a simpler formulation of the correct approach that refers only to the
    end of the trial: the trier of fact should, Major J. said, weigh all the evidence, both direct and
    circumstantial, to determine whether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case. If he has, the
    defendant must “negate” that evidence, failing which the plaintiff will succeed.

    7. The defendants and the defense counsels can negate the plaintiff's extremely serious claims by producing a single document from the court records and end this litigation on October 22, 2019 and get over a million dollars from the plaintiffs that is well over the amount they are seeking in this litigation.

    a. Produce a single document that is date stamped by the front desk Clark and strata plan entered on the document by the front desk Clark entered into the evidence and the court records that will substantiate the defense witnesses Ms. Lyn Campbell and Mr. George Alexandru testimonies under oath of existence of strict policy of date stamping the owners written complaints by the front desk Clark.

    8. The plaintiffs gives the following undertaking to this court and the Honourable judge that upon production of a single document entered at the trial as evidence by the defendants that confirms at the hearing on October 22, 2019 the existence of the strict policy of date stamping the owners written complaints at VCS than:

    a) The plaintiffs will concede and the plaintiffs will hand over the keys to their unit valued at over $1 million dollars to the defendants that will more than cover the defendants claims of $920, 000 and the plaintiffs will end this litigation on October 22, 2019 and;

    b) The plaintiffs will sign the transfer documents to their home in front of the Honourable Judge on October 22, 2019.

    9. There can only be one reason why the defendants will not produce a single document and end this litigation that would be because there is no such evidence of the strict policy of date stamping owners written complaints that existed at VCS or exists in the court records.

    10. This evidence will unarguably prove beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendants have procured the judgment of the court by fraud upon the court by fabricated evidence under oath that never existed at VCS nor exists in the court records in the Supreme Court action # S070817. The duty is imposed on the Honourable court to follow the law impartially and under court Rule 9-5 struck off the defendants’ entire defense with prejudice that is based on fabricated false and inadmissible evidence and declare the orders of the trial judge of British Columbia rendered on November 6, 2015 void and set aside.

    AN ORDER PROCURED BY FRAUD

    “An order procured by fraud, can be attacked at any time, in any court, either directly or collaterally, provided that the party is properly before the court, ” Long v. Shorebank Development Corp., 182 F.3d 548 (C.A. 7 Ill. (1999). Void judgment issued in excess of jurisdiction: “There is no discretion to ignore lack of jurisdiction.” Joyce v. U.S. 474 2D 2). “Once jurisdiction is challenged, the court cannot proceed but rather, should dismiss the action.” Melo v. US, 505 F2d 1026 See Stuck v. Medical Examiners, 94 Ca 2d 751. 211 P2d 389. “Once challenged, jurisdiction cannot be assumed, it must be proven to exist.” See also Joyce v. US, 474 F2d 215., “There is no discretion to ignore that lack of jurisdiction.” See also Rosemond V. Lambert, 469 F2d 416., The burden shifts to the courts to prove jurisdiction.

    11. This evidence on October 22, 2019 will indisputably establish the Proof beyond a reasonable doubt, that no other logical explanation can be arrived at and will establish the fact that the trial judge’s orders are based on the evidence of defense witness that the trial judge knew with substantial certainty to be false and untrue and inadmissible as evidence and were brought to the attention of the trial judge before the order was sealed.

    The decision of the court is expected on October 22, 2019, that will be published here. You can excess to full submission on this link: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1A7aPhGF28CfoZ13rx0ZfX2VEtbMaDXTN

    1 Votes
  • Mo
    Mohd Ali Hirji Feb 05, 2020

    FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS SECRETARY-GENERAL HIS EXCELLENCY MR. ANTÓNIO GUTERRES.

    FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE UNITED NATIONS HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS HER EXCELLENCY MICHELLE BACHELET.

    From: Mohd Ali Hirji [mailto:[email protected]]
    Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2020 5:46 AM
    To: [email protected]
    Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'
    Subject: FW: Miscarrage of justice

    Mohd Ali Hirji and Parin Mohd Ali Hirji Lalani
    1084 Lillooet Road,
    North Vancouver,
    British Columbia
    V7j 2H8.
    Canada.
    Email: [email protected]
    Email: [email protected]
    Website: http://www.mohdhirji.com

    Request to The Ismaili Imamat
    Global Centre for Pluralism
    330 Sussex Drive
    Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 0C7
    Canada
    January 30, 2020

    His Highness the Aga Khan - Chairman;

    The Rt. Hon. Adrienne Clarkson; PC; CC; CMM; COM; CD;

    We are proud and loyal Canadian Ismaili Muslims. We emigrated from London England in 1987 and settled in Vancouver Canada and made Canada our home.
    We are requesting the Ismaili Imamat in Canada with other institutions to assist us in peaceful resolution in opposing the injustices, atrocities, and unlawfully imposed miscarriage of justice on us by the State Courts of Canada for past five years for the crimes that we did not commit as evidenced by indisputable evidence in the court records.
    Canada is one of the most civilized countries in the world and one of the prominent members of the United Nations General Assembly who is in blatant violation of our guaranteed Constitutional and Charter of Rights and Freedom, as well as International Covenants. The Government of Canada has failed to protect our guaranteed Rights that are enshrined in the Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedom and are in violations of International covenants ratified by Canada.
    If the Imamat finds that there has been a gross Miscarriage of Justice imposed on us by the Canadian Courts for the past five years for the crimes that we did not commit than as a member of Ismaili Community we would expect the imamat to assist us from injustices that has been our tradition and our tariqa that imposes a duty on every Muslim to oppose injustices peacefully with dialog and reasoning from the time of our first imam Hazrat Ali (A.S).

    Imam Ali said: "Justice is the essence of the people's welfare as well as the adherence to the Divine path".
    He further said: "Justice is life and cruelty is the death of society".
    Hence, those who submit themselves before oppression are in fact as good as dead bodies

    We are law-abiding and honest Canadian Citizens. Our family name and our charitable work speak for itself. One of the family members Dr. Roshan Thomas also known as Dr. Roshan Hirji Thomas was honoured in the Canadian Senate on May 29, 2014.

    The Hirji’s name has been tainted by irresponsible and incompetent judge Madam justice Sharma ("the trial judge") in Supreme Court Action No. S070817. The trial judge intentionally and unlawfully fabricated the evidence throughout the reasons for judgement that the trial judge knew to be false and untrue and never existed at the trial, nor does it exist in the court records as laid down in our factum filed on January 17, 2020, in the court of Appeal that is listed at the end of this document.

    The state courts of British Columbia are acting as trespassers of law and are acting lawlessly contrary to the Constitution and contrary to the International covenants. The courts have deliberately violated our Constitutional rights that are enshrined under the Charter of Rights and Freedom s. 7, s.11 (d) and s. 15 as well as under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with ARTICLE 9.

    The Courts have issued orders that are based on fraud upon the court that the courts cannot legally enforce in law, but the courts have attempted to enforce it through the back door by issuing orders and preventing us from seeking remedy for fraud upon the court until we pay for the orders procured by fraud upon the Court that is based on the evidence that neither existed at the trial nor exists in the court records and until we pay the defendants $920, 000 for the crimes we did not commit but based on the orders procured by fraud upon the Court that in law “unravels all” The Courts have kept issuing unlawful orders that say;

    “The plaintiffs cannot institute any legal proceedings in any registry in the British Columbia Supreme Court, without leave of the court, until after they have paid in full the outstanding cost order against them made April 24, 2017, in BC Supreme Court, Vancouver Registry, Action No. S070817”

    We are left without a remedy that is in violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 2(3) and the fraudulent orders of the courts that are legally unenforceable in law.

    BRIEF HISTORY OF THIS CASE.

    On April 7, 2015, we appeared in a 22 day trial before the Honourable Madam justice Sharma (“the trial Judge”) and proved our burden of proof and our case with cogent evidence. The defendants failed to negate our evidence with any credible evidence. As evidenced by court records.
    On November 6, 2015, the trial judge rendered her reasons for judgement that is based on the evidence that the trial judge knew to be false and untrue, and neither existed at the trial for the trial judge to make an informed decisions, nor does the evidence existed at the trial, nor does the evidence exists in the court records.

    This fact was brought to the attention of the trial judge on more than one occasion by us and the trial judge was requested to correct the erroneous judgement and strike off the inadmissible evidence of the defendants before the orders of the trial judge were sealed as evidenced by court records.

    The trial judge failed/refused to correct her own palpable and overriding errors by abusing the judicial power for the purpose other than the public good. The trial judge issued orders amounting to $920, 000 for the crimes we did not commit based on the evidence that never existed in the court nor exists in the court records nor can the trial judge substantiate her findings.
    On September 29, 2016, The Chambers judge Madam Justice Newbury upheld the trial judge’s orders based on the evidence that never existed at the trial nor exists in the court records. The Chambers judge used the courts discretion and dismissed our application for extension of time and declared our appeal as abandoned and awarded cost against us despite the fact that the defendants had no objection to extending the time to file our appeal materials that were delayed by a single day due to reasons that were beyond our control and due to open-heart surgery of Mrs. Hirji in June 2016.

    On November 25, 2016, the Hirjis’ appeared before the penal of three judges of the Court of Appeal of B.C Honourable Mr. justice Ian T. Donald, Honourable Madam Justice Mary E. Saunders, and Honourable Madam Justice Elizabeth A. Bennett.

    Hirji attempted to submit his submissions why the court should overturn the wrong decision of Justice Newbury and attempted to submit the “palpable and overriding errors” of the trial judge that removes the foundations from underneath the trial judges Reasons for Judgment and establishes the violations of Hirjis’ charter rights submitted to justice Newbury that established the basis for the appellate court’s interference.

    The Division court judges unreasonably declined to hear the facts and the relief sought by Hirjis’s and declined to hear the Hirjis’ full submission on Justice Newbury’s Reasons for Judgment in schedule I and the Justice Newbury’s approval of the void judgment of the trial judge.

    The penal of judges’ unreasonable refusal and a denial of Due process and a fair hearing that is evidenced by the Court of Appeal Chambers Hearing Transcript of November 25, 2015 Panel of judges did not ask for an explanation or confirmation or denial of facts on Hirjis’ submissions from the defence counsel and arbitrarily dismissed the Hirjis’ application and awarded costs against the Hirjis’.

    On January 18, 2017, Hirjis’ filed their application for leave to appeal in the Supreme Court of Canada.

    The court records and the evidence confirms that on April 27, 2017, all nine judges of the Supreme Court of Canada, Honourable Beverley McLachlin, P.C. Chief Justice of Canada, Honourable Justice Russell Brown, Honourable Justice Clément Gascon, Honourable Justice Suzanne Côté, Honourable Justice Malcolm Rowe, Honourable Justice Andromache Karakatsanis, Honourable justice Rosalie Silberman Abella, Honourable Justice Michael J. Moldaver, Honourable Justice Richard Wagner, approved the void orders of lower courts and made it into law and dismissed the Hirjis’ application and ordered costs against the Hirjis.

    The issue, in this case, is the Court Order issued by an incompetent trial judge Madame Justice Sharma supported and upheld by the court of Appeal judges and the “Supreme Court of Canada” that the court judges can neither substantiate nor justify in law.

    The issue as far as the courts are concern is $920, 000. As Honest and law-abiding Canadian citizens I am issuing the following challenge publicly for the record. The courts have destroyed our lives and have persecuted us for the past five years for the crimes that we did not commit. The courts have a burden of proof and justify their orders that deprives us of our lives saving and our home but for the crimes intentionally and unlawful committed by the trial judge who fabricated and admitted the inadmissible evidence of the defendants that the trial judge knew to be false and untrue and neither existed at the trial nor exists in the court records.

    TO ALL THE JUDGES, AND ALL LEGAL COUNSELS ASSOCIATED WITH ACTION # S070817.

    The Hirji’s are issuing this public Challenge to clear their name that is tainted by intentional, unlawful, and fraudulent acts committed by the trial judge and the failures of the court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada judges to uphold our guaranteed Constitutional rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedom of a fair trial by an impartial judge and equal benefit of the law.
    The court has the burden of proof to justify their orders by showing to us and to the general public by producing a single document in the court records that is material to the outcome of the litigation that tilted the balance in the defendants' favour in Action # S070817.

    The court and the defendants have the burden of proof to produce evidence of the existence of the material evidence that can confirm that:

    “The owners' complaints were date stamped and the clerks at the front desk would always ensure that there was a -- the strata plan was on there”.

    The trial judge’s almost entire reason for judgement is based on the following fabricated testimony of the defence witness Ms. Lyn Campbell under oath led by the defence counsel Mr. Eged at the trial who knew that the evidence they are submitting to the court under oath is false and untrue and neither existed nor exists in the court records; Ms. Lyn Campbell at the trial testified the following under oath:

    42
    Lynlaeh Campbell (for Defendants)
    In chief by Mr. Eged

    25 A-Okay.
    26 Q -- okay? And, in particular, I'd like you to tell
    27 Her Ladyship how Vancouver Condominium Services
    28 handled paperwork that was brought to the office by
    29 an owner of one of the strata that it was
    30 managing.
    31 A-Okay. It would come in. It was always date
    32 stamped and the clerks at the front desk would
    33 always ensure that there was a -- the strata plan
    34 was on there. Then it would be put in a folder to
    35 be given to the property manager, and then that
    36 correspondence was added to the agenda for the next
    37 council meeting and put on the agenda. So
    38 everything was definitely date stamped and recorded
    39 coming into the office.
    40 Q Okay. I'm going to ask you to turn to Exhibit 6 in
    41 that binder in front of you please, Ms. Campbell.
    42 Okay. Have a look at that document, ma'am. You
    43 can see it says at the bottom, "Urgent" by hand,
    44 "Attention: Ms. Campbell"?
    45 A Yes.
    46 Q Okay. And you've seen this before; correct?
    47 A In the binders that you gave me, yes.
    43
    Lynlaeh Campbell (for Defendants)
    In chief by Mr. Eged

    1 Q Yes. And do you have any recollection of seeing
    2 this on -- on or near the date indicated on the
    3 document of October 6th, 2000?
    4 A No.
    5 Q Does it bear the stamp that you would expect to --
    6 this document to bear if that had been delivered?
    7 A No.
    8 Q Do you recall ever dealing with Mr. Hirji in
    9 respect of his desire to rent out either whole or
    10 part of his unit?
    11 A No, I don't.
    12 Q Do you recall if this document made it into a
    13 folder that you've described as property manager
    14 for this condominium, and later into the minutes?
    15 A No.
    16 Q Do you recall any discussions with Mr. Hirji
    17 regarding renting to students?
    18 A No.
    19 Q Based on the look of this document and your
    20 recollection about it, could you say whether or not
    21 you received it?
    22 A I could not, no. It's ...

    If the courts can fulfill their judicial obligations and their burden of proof by producing a single document that is in the court records that can confirm the existence of policy of date stamping owners complaints by the front desk clerk and the strata plan entered on any of the documents by the front desk clerk in the court records, either by the trial judge or by any of the defence counsels, that can prove the fact that the above testimony and evidence of the defence witness under oath by Ms. Lyn Campbell led by the lead defence counsel Mr. Eged did existed at the trial and does exist in the court records and was not fabricated to obstruct and defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding and the trial judge did not commit fraud upon the court and the trial judge made an informed decision based on the evidence that exists in the court records than;
    Mohd Ali Hirji and Parin Mohd Ali Hirji give this public undertaking to the Supreme Court of Canada, the Court of Appeal of British Columbia, the Supreme Court of British Columbia, as well as the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, as well as All the Members of the Canadian Parliament and MLA's that Hirjis will hand over the keys and the deeds to their home valued at over a million dollars and that, will be the end of this litigation.

    In the event, the courts or the defence counsels fails to produce just one document in next 30 days from today from the court records and publish it in any media where it can be accessed and verified by the members of public that are material to the outcome of the litigation in Action # S070817 in favour of the defendants than this will establish without any reasonable doubt that the defence counsels and the trial judge has intentionally and unlawfully committed “fraud upon the court” based on the evidence that neither existed at the trial or in the court records to defraud the Hirjis out of their legitimate claim for damages and make them homeless by abusing the court system and committing fraud.

    This will also establish the failures of the Court of Appeal and the Supreme court of Canada to follow the law and fulfill their judicial obligations and uphold the rule of law as guardians of the law.

    MR. EGED'S AFFIDAVIT EVIDENCE ESTABLISHED THE FRAUD UPON THE COURT.

    Mr. Eged's evidence in his Affidavit filed on November 23, 2015, establishes fraud upon the court. Mr. Eged at Paragraph 37 confirms the defence witnesses and the defence counsels misled the court with the evidence that they knew to be false and untrue and neither existed at Vancouver condominium services nor does it exist in the court records. Mr. Eged evidence in his Affidavit confirms the following;

    "I had considered an amount of $5, 000 for the Plaintiffs claim for loss of rental income, that being $100 per month for eight months a year from February 2005 to July 2010. In my view, this figure represented a reasonable reduction for not having access to a deck on a bedroom rented for $800 per month, during which time the evidence was that the Plaintiffs took no steps to mitigate their loss."

    The above evidence of the defendants that is clear, convincing, and undisputable that proves that the defendants procured the orders of the court by committing fraud upon the court.

    This evidence came to light after the trial had ended. Based on this evidence alone the court of appeal should be able to dispose of this case on well¬ established rule of law and on the basis that Fraud "unravels all". And set aside trial judges orders in Action # S070817 and all subsequent orders of the court originating from trial judge’s orders.

    As law-abiding Canadian Citizens we have lost complete faith and confidence in the Supreme Court of British Columbia justice system and the judicial officers’ ability, in this case, to follow the established rules of law and render justice impartially in compliance with the Constitution and uphold the rule of law.

    We are convinced that we will not get a fair appeal hearing that is filed in the Court of Appeal on January 17, 2020, for fraud upon the court intentionally and unlawfully committed by the trial judge Madam justice Sharma who was appointed by the federal government as a judge in December 2013, nor are we confident that the Court of Appeal of British Columbia will follow the rules of law or the Constitution and will uphold the rule of law unless the ministry of justice or the department of public prosecution or the Human Rights Committee intervenes and reminds the member state Canada of their legal obligations under Article 2(3) Article 6, Article 9, Article 14, 14(5) Article 16, and Article 26 that are binding on member state Canada.

    In the event the Court of Appeal of British Columbia fails to address the issues of “fraud upon the court” and intentionally and unlawfully committed acts of bad faith by the trial judge, as well as the Respondents and their legal counsels, in our Appeal filed on January 17, 2020, then we request the Ismaili imamat and Ismaili institution to work with other institution and the United Nations in the interest of justice not only for us but for every community in the world to oppose and defeat these injustices and atrocities imposed on us by the trial judge for the crime we did not commit.

    The trial judge intentionally, unlawfully and recklessly abused the judicial power and fabricated the trial evidence that the trial judge knew to be false and untrue and neither existed at the trial nor exists in the court records.

    The court records prove the facts that the court of Appeal of British Columbia and the Supreme Court of Canada have failed to follow the well-established Rule of law and failed to carry out their judicial duties and upheld the orders of the trial judge that is based on the evidence that does not exist in the court records.

    The State courts have persecuted us for the past five years for the crime that we did not commit. The courts have unlawfully imposed this miscarriage of justice on us to protect the trial judge’s fraudulent and unlawful orders and acts of bad faith and have compromised their oath of office and have failed to protect the Constitution and uphold the supreme law of the land and rule of law as evidenced by the undisputable court records.

    This issue is of significant importance not only for the welfare of the members of the minority of Ismaili community living in Canada but other minority communities that are living in this country and who have made Canada their home.

    This case is also of such a significance and importance for the United Nations General Assembly to address because it defeats the very existent of United Nations General Assembly and its covenants to protect the Human Rights that are blatantly violated by the agents/servants of the crown by one of the most prominent members of the United Nations General Assembly that deliberately, and unlawfully, and openly defies the International covenants ratified by the member state.

    We also urge every member of the United Nations General Assembly to consider the issue in this case on its merit, that if the state court judges are allowed to fraudulently fabricate the evidence that does not exist in the court records, and unlawfully denies justice to the litigants and issues orders that will deprive them of their property, and make them homeless, and the court of Appeal upholds the trial judges fraudulent orders, and judgement, to protect the trial judge’s fraudulent acts, and the highest court in the land, the Supreme court of Canada approves and upholds the fraudulent orders of the lower courts and deprives the litigants of justice and their Constitutional rights, under the domestic as well as the international laws then these acts are no less evil than the acts committed against the victims of World War II by the judicial officers who deprived the victims of their lives assets and their properties that led to establishment of United Nations General Assembly.

    These blatant violations of the United Nations guarantees and its Covenants ratified by the member state can only result in loss of confidence in the UN institutions and its members. This can only lead to undesirable results and public rebellion and break down in the Rule of law and Law and order.

    If the members state courts are allowed to make these laws based on the evidence that does not exist and pollute the world’s judicial system than the Rule of Law cannot and will not be respected by any members of public and the United Nations General Assembly should demand an explanations from the members state urge them to comply with the covenants and rectify the violations of the covenants before it is too late.

    Following documents relating to this case that is filed in the Court of Appeal Registry that is self-explanatory and can be accessed through our website at Mohdalihirji.com ;

    1. APPELLANT'S APPEAL RECORD FILED ON DECEMBER 18, 2019.
    2. APPELLANTS FACTUM FILED JANUARY 17, 2020.
    3. APPELLANTS APPEAL BOOK JANUARY 17, 2020 VOL.1 (PENDING REVIEW BY THE REGISTRAR)
    4. APPELLANTS APPEAL BOOK FILED JANUARY 17, 2020 VOL 2
    5. APPELLANTS APPEAL BOOK FILED JANUARY 17, 2020 VOL 3
    6. APPELLANTS APPEAL BOOK JANUARY 17, 2020 VOL 4
    7. HOME EQUITY MORTGAGE CORPORATION.
    8. APPELLANTS BOOK OF AUTHORITIES.

    We look forward to hearing from you,

    Yours Sincerely,

    Mohd Ali Hirji.

    C.c Elected officials of Government of Canada.

    C.c Members of United Nations General Assembly,

    C.c [email protected]

    3 Votes
  • Su
    Supreme Court Feb 12, 2020

    Justice Neana Sharma is the pawn who fails to hear evidence and “FALSIFYING FACFS” of cases brought in front of her has become habitual.

    Sharma is a disgrace to the judicial system in Canada and her colleagues believe her to be a retard.

    Now let’s think as fo why her colleagues believe her to be just a dumb judge who was appointed when there was a shortage of judges.

    I will tell you why and the truth of the matter is that she screwed her boss

    A liar and makes up false evidence a cheat and ugliest judge in Vancouver

    1 Votes

Post your comment