 |
| GREG HARNEY |
The "
bitches on the bench" at the
British Columbia Court of Appeal have soiled the reputation of the
Court, again, by finding in favour of lawyer
Greg Harney in his million dollar fee dispute fee with the
English family and their holding companies that he briefly represented when the
Government of British Columbia and its agents used terrorism and other crimes to loot the
English family property at fire sale prices after agents of the Government started the fires and used other criminal tactics to cheat the English family and steal their property.
The
corrupt panel of three judges at the
Court of Appeal turned a blind eye to
clear evidence of fraud and fabrication of evidence by
Victoria lawyer Greg Harney.
Experienced lawyers say the bill should have been between $10,000 and $25,000 so why did the
bitches on the bench allow this Travesty of Justice to stand especially when there was evidence of criminal activity in the proceedings by the lawyer in order to advance his case.
The Editors believe that insiders with the
Government of British Columbia blackmailed or threatened the three judges,
Elizabeth Bennett,
Mary Saunders and
Nicole Garson because that is
the only plausible reason the judges would go against the law that clearly favoured
Mr. English and his family companies and reject the new evidence that
Mr. English had uncovered that proved that lawyer
Greg Harney, or someone acting on his behalf, fabricated false evidence that he used to persuade the lower court judge,
Master Peter Keighley, to grant a judgment against the English family for $220,000 in what was clearly a corrupt billing practice.
 |
| Bitch Liz Bennett |
The allegation that
Elizabeth Bennett would succumb to blackmail or some other threat is easy to believe because
Elizabeth has a clear track record of benefitting criminal insiders with the
British Columbia Government and was appointed a judge after a career with the
British Columbia Crown prosecution service wheinflater re she is reported to have been part of their crooked pedofile cover up squad of lawyers protecting some of
Vancouver's dirtiest sexual perverts and child abusers that included a number of government employees including some judges and prominent lawyers. It is believed that
Bennett will
profit from the decision because of her pension plan investments that are managed by
British Columbia Investment Management Corporation the company that profited from the crimes carried out against the
English family.
Click here to read blog dedicated to exposing corrupt Bitch / Judge Liz Bennett
 |
| Bitch Mary Saunders |
The allegation against Justice Mary Saunders is also believable because she
Campney and Murphy that dissolved after its major client
Eron Mortgage was caught in a
"massive fraud" where thousands of investors investors lost an estimated $182 million..Saunders was appointed in 1992 by Prime
Minister Brian Mulroney and
Justice Minister Kim Campbell both of whom had a reputation for appointing criminals and sleaze bags to the court.
 |
| BITCH NICOLE GARSON |
Harney initially sent Mr. English a $1 million dollar bill for a couple of days of court work and, according to English, pretending to look for alternate financing. Harney then used threats of legal proceedings if English did not immediately approve the bill which is a form of extortion and a criminal offence in Canada but Mary Liz and Nicole,
the bitches on the bench, felt that was just fine which means that other lawyers can rely on this ugly precedent to act in a similar manner.
Knowing that his initial bill was "
an act of obvious insanity", Harney then sent a revised bill for $550,000 and commenced a lawsuit to collect the grossly inflated bill.
The initial hearing was before Master Peter Keighley who is suspected to be part of the
Freemason criminal gang that operates inside the British Columbia court system.
Keighley first came to the editors attention due to his role in the destruction of
British Columbia lawyer
Karl Eisbrenner where
Keighley presided over a
Kangaroo court that relied upon a fraudulent psychiatric report craftily devised by a fraudulent psychiatrist to label
Mr. Eisbrenner as delusional and disbar him because
Eisbrenner was working on a law case that might have destroyed the career of yet to be elected
BC Premier Gordon Campbell. Campbell.
Click here to read more about the case of Karl Eisbrenner.
Keighley should never have presided on the
Harney v English case case because he is an employee of the BC Government, he is not a judge, and he had an indirect financial interest in the outcomebecause of her pension plan investments that are managed by
British Columbia Investment Management Corporation the company that profited from the crimes carried out against the English family a fact that did not become apparent to the English family until many months after the hearing but that Keighly knew about from the day he entered the courtroom.
EVIDENCE OF FABRICATION OF EVIDENCE (from the factum)
1.
After the hearing before the Registrar and the
Chambers Judge, the appellants discovered that the respondents had not
delivered and served the Appointment “with the bill attached” upon the
appellants as required by the Legal Profession Act and the respondents had
improperly entered in the court record the altered backdated bill that was
subsequently relied upon by the Registrar without proper delivery or service.
2. The admission of the new evidence of the improper
use of the altered back dated bill and the failure to comply with the mandatory
procedures of the Legal Profession Act with respect to delivery and service of
the bill satisfies tests of relevance, reliability and reasonable likelihood of
effecting the outcome of the hearings because this evidence goes directly to
jurisdiction and raises the a reasonable suspicion of fraud by the respondents
that should be addressed and responded to by the Court.
3 The
Appointment that commenced the review proceeding before the Registrar under the
Legal Profession Act named John English and three corporate entities as
respondents, but none of those corporations nor John English were identified as
persons charged in the bill that was attached to the Appointment that was used
to commence the proceeding contrary to the Legal Profession Act and the Supreme
Court Civil Rules.
Statement of Facts, paragraph 17 to
19.
Legal Profession Act, SBC 1998, c. 9,
s.69. and 70.
Supreme Court Civil Rules, Rule 14-1,
(21) and (22).
Affidavit
6 of English, CA040838, November 19, 2014, para 6, Exhibit” D”.
Affidavit 7 of English, CA040838,
February 9, 2015, para 2 to 7, Exhibits “D"
4. The
bill that was attached to the Appointment had not been previously delivered to
the appellants Angleland, Nederland, Paradise Beach Resorts Inc. or John
English contrary to s. 69 (1) of the Legal Profession Act.
Legal Profession Act, SBC, 1998, c.9, s.
69 (1).
Interpretation Act RSBC 1996,
c. 238, s. 29.
Statement of Facts, para. 17.
5. The
Appointment with the bill attached was not served upon any of the persons
charged with the bill as required by section 70 (4) of the Legal Profession Act
and the Supreme Court Civil Rules.
Legal Profession Act, SBC, 1998, c.9,
s. 70 (4).
Supreme Court Civil Rules, Rule 14-1, (21) and (22).
Statement
of Facts, para. 19.
6. The
review was carried out by the registrar was on the basis of the altered back
dated bill that had never been delivered or served to any of the appellant
Transcript, March13, 2014, p. 23,
l.40. to p. 24, l.23.
Statement
of Facts, para. 20 -23.
7. The
Registrar did not have jurisdiction to conduct a review of a bill that had not
been delivered and served upon the appellants in compliance with Part 8 of the
Legal Profession Act.
Kelly v
McMillan, 2003 BCJ, No. 430.
8.
As a result of the failure of the respondents
to comply with the mandatory scheme set out in the Legal Professions Act, the Registrar
lacked jurisdiction review the bill, to allow charges and disbursements for any
services provided by the respondents to the appellants and to issue the
certificates of fees against the appellants.
Legal
Profession Act, SBC [1998], c. 9,
Part 8, ss. 64-79
Kelly v McMillan, 2003 BCJ, No. 430, Goepel, J.
Tungohan v Gebara, 2011, BCJ, No. 2145,
Registrar Sainty.
