Jump to content
Jambands.ca

StoneMtn

Members
  • Posts

    7,008
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by StoneMtn

  1. When does a person ever know an entire story?

    I'm pretty sure I referred to his alleged behaviour as callous and sociopathic, actually, and I'm pretty sure I said that I thought so based on publications yesterday.

    Perhaps you should read more carefully.

  2. Actually, I hadn't heard any of the details you just told me. I had read yesterday reports by other bike couriers that the victim was not a hot-head, well-liked, and was the type to avoid all altercations with drivers.

    If this new information is true, my opinion may be different.

  3. I've never successfully seen them, but always wanted to.

    I vividly remember being outside "Club Z" in Toronto, circumnavigating the building with my friend Russell, at the age of 14, having figured out there was no legal way to pay to get into this licensed gig, and trying to figure out how two young skateboarders might break into the building.

    Probably best we gave up.

    Anyway, I've heard they put on an amazing "psychedelic punk" show, but have never had the pleasure; not for want of trying.

  4. Just in...

    Thursday, August 27, 2009

    Lawsuit Improves Chances for Endangered Whales

    The Federal Court decided today not to halt the American research vessel poised to begin seismic testing in the Endeavor hydrothermal vents, a marine protected area off the coast of Vancouver Island. However, while we were suing Foreign Affairs over allowing the research vessel entry into Canadian waters, the government decided to impose stronger environmental conditions on the vessel's operations in this highly sensitive area.

    Our case gained significant attention and drew the public’s eye to the risks facing endangered whales during seismic testing. The risks to marine mammals are real, but we hope they have been reduced by our legal efforts. Or as Justice Kelen himself wrote in the Federal Court's ruling today:

    “…in fact, their (Ecojustice, CPAWS and Living Oceans Society) imminent legal action may have precipitated the requirement for increased mitigation measures.â€

    We hope that the government will continue to improve the protection of whales in BC waters, and we’ll continue to work towards better regulation of seismic testing in our oceans and for the full protection of endangered species in all of our marine protected areas.

  5. I got a call just yesterday from the CRA:

    "Hi. I am just calling because you owe $37,000.00 in taxes. How would you like to pay that today?"

    "My taxes are completely paid up."

    "I wouldn't be phoning you if they were, but let's see here. Oh, there is a payment of this amount, and a payment of this amount, and a payment of this amount... Okay, I am re-applying those payments ... then I think you owe $7,000.00."

    "Why don't you go and add it up and confirm for yourself that it's all paid, and if you find out that's wrong, you call me back."

    "I wouldn't be phoning if it was all paid up."

    "10 seconds ago you thought I owe $37,000.00. Now you are down to $7,000.00. Do you not think that you may be in error?"

    "Thank you for your time. I have made the changes."

    "Ya. Thanks for calling."

  6. Groups go to court to stop US seismic research in Canadian waters

    VANCOUVER, BC Aug 24, 2010

    VANCOUVER – In the midst of a lawsuit launched by environmental groups, the Minister of Foreign Affairs has just granted permission for a controversial American research ship to conduct seismic blasting in a Canadian marine protected area. The Minister granted this permit at the close of business hours Friday night, despite an ongoing lawsuit by environmental groups challenging the legality of the permit on the basis that the ship will violate Canadian environmental laws.

    Ecojustice, on behalf of Living Oceans Society and Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, will argue the lawsuit in Federal Court on Tuesday in an attempt to stay the permit granted to the US vessel. The proposed seismic tests would threaten endangered whales in the Endeavour Hydrothermal Vents – a Canadian marine protected area located approximately 250km off the coast of British Columbia. The lawsuit alleges that Canada’s Minister of Foreign Affairs cannot grant clearance to a foreign vessel that will harass marine mammals in violation of Canadian law.

    “We are shocked that the government would allow seismic testing in one of Canada’s few marine protected areas,†says CPAWS National Oceans Manager Sabine Jessen, “The reason marine protected areas exist is to keep harmful activities from occurring in special areas that protect the animals living there, including endangered species like blue whales.â€

    The research vessel R.V. Marcus Langseth would cause intense acoustic disturbance from a 36 air gun seismic array, which would blast at 180 decibels every 2 or 3 minutes. The seismic blasts would gather information about the structure of the local sub-seafloor and are slated to continue for one month. The Minister of Foreign Affairs granted the research vessel permission to enter Canadian waters at the close of business hours on Friday. The ship set sail for the Endeavour Hydrothermal Vents from Astoria, Oregon at 10:30am (PST) Saturday and could begin seismic blasting as early as Monday.

    “The seismic researchers’ own evidence states that they will be causing harassment of whales, and they were required to apply for a U.S. whale harassment permit,†says Living Oceans Society’s Oonagh O’Connor. “We are disappointed that the Canadian government has allowed harmful research in BC's waters."

    "In Canada, is it illegal to disturb and harass whales and dolphins," says Ecojustice Staff Lawyer Lara Tessaro. "We're seeking to turn this ship around, to uphold Canadian environmental laws, and to prevent whale harassment in Canadian waters."

    The case will be heard at 9am PST/12pm EST on Tuesday, August 25th. Justice Michael Kelen will preside over the case from the Federal Court in Ottawa at 90 Sparks Street. Ecojustice lawyer Lara Tessaro will provide arguments on location in Ottawa, with lawyers from Columbia and the Federal government appearing by video link from the Federal Court in Vancouver (701 West Georgia Street).

    www.ecojustice.ca

  7. Yep. That's the direct translation. It means, really, "voluntary assumption of risk", the point being that if you voluntarily go somewhere with the expectation that certain things will happen, and then those things happen causing you injury, you cannot then foist liability upon someone else, as you went in with your eyes open. The point is not that you can't be injured, but you voluntarily assumed the risk of injury.

    The most obvious example is a consensual fist-fight. If you agree to fight, willingly, you cannot later sue someone because he hit you and you were injured. (Of course, you get to argue that he did something you never anticipated - or the dolphins did - but that's the point.)

  8. Ex-Stripper Wins Battle Against Taxman

    MONTREAL — In a legal showdown against a tax-wary former stripper, it’s the Canada Revenue Agency that’s been caught with its pants down.

    The legal saga over $2 million in undeclared revenue began in storybook fashion at Chez Paree — a pricey Montreal strip club patronized over the years by scores of wealthy executives and visiting athletes, including some very prominent hockey Hall of Famers.

    Martine Landry was a dancer at the Montreal institution and was particularly popular with one rich, elderly customer who struck up a relationship with her.

    He showered her with gifts over the years worth about $2 million: a Corvette, money to buy a BMW, eight fur coats, jewels, a vacation, cash to buy a big downtown bar and get out of the dancing business, and $168,000 in $1,000 bills for a down payment on a house.

    According to a judgment rendered by the Tax Court of Canada, the mystery benefactor, named in court documents as Mr. X, paid Landry largely to keep him company, not to dance.

    Landry in turn recounted that she was attracted to his vast knowledge of all things and, over time, the publishing-industry magnate, now 80, began to introduce her to a world she knew nothing of.

    What blossomed was an 11-year relationship that quickly took on — according to Landry’s court testimony — a “father-daughter“ dynamic.

    Landry would often accompany her benefactor to the Montreal casino, where he would give her the winnings to deposit in her account.

    But eventually her low income statements and sky-high living expenses raised alarm bells at the federal revenue agency.

    By this time, Landry had long quit dancing and was the owner of the popular Montreal watering hole Mr. X had helped her acquire.

    A net-worth audit showed a major discrepancy between revenues evaluated against assets and outgoing expenses, the difference being subject to taxes unless she could prove where the money came from.

    And like many Canadians, Landry had a difference of opinion with the federal taxman about how much money she actually owed.

    The feds demanded $602,617 in taxes and penalties for the years 1998 to 2002.

    But the Tax Court of Canada sided with Landry in a recent judgment. Judge Robert Hogan ruled the gifts could not be taxed.

    In Canada, gifts, inheritances, and windfall gains from lotteries or other gambling are not considered taxable.

    But tax experts say it’s very common for people who frequently receive gifts — exotic dancers being a notable example — to be caught in such a legal quagmire.

    Hogan ruled that a more thorough investigation by the CRA would have provided the answers they sought without having to drag the matter to court.

    When the CRA began to raise doubts about her lifestyle, Landry sought to protect the name of her wealthy friend and Mr. X, for his part, was less than forthcoming in his chats with the taxman.

    “After hearing the evidence in its entirety and having heard the testimony of Mr. X, I have to observe that the CRA failed in its obligation to lead a reasonable investigation on the validity of the statements made by the appellant on the subject of Mr. X,†Hogan said.

    “If the CRA had pushed further in the investigation with Mr. X., they would have easily been able to find the truth and the existence of gifts.â€

    Landry’s lawyer, Yves Ouellette, said in a radio interview he was pleased with the decision.

    “In the end, it’s a case that’s strictly a fiscal case,“ Ouellette said.

    “We tried to explain these differences by the gifts she had received and the money was won at the casino.â€

    But the story’s not over. Revenue Quebec still wants $643,000 in taxes and penalties and that case is playing out in a Quebec court. Ouellette hopes the favourable decision will help in the Quebec case.

    There’s one final order of business in this affair: Landry is now considering a lawsuit against the Canada Revenue Agency.

×
×
  • Create New...