DID THEY BREACH OUR TRUST?

WHAT IS FRAUD AND BREACH OF TRUST

Fraud and Breach of Trust are likely the two most commonly charged dishonesty offenses. Fraud involves obtaining a benefit (not necessarily financial) through dishonesty. Breach of Trust involves abusing a position of authority for self-benefit and against the interests of the person to whom you owe the duty of trust.

VIOLATING DUTIES OF OFFICE OR TRUST

This section makes it a criminal offence for a public officer to intentionally and knowingly commit an act that violates the duties of their office or position of trust, for the purpose of gaining a personal benefit or causing harm to another individual or institution.

WHAT CAN YOU DO?

Now that you have studied the allegations and have made a decision regarding the legitimacy of plaintiffs concerns. It is crucial to understand that our voices, your voices, can shape the narrative and bring about change. This investigation itself could have far reaching implications. We have already had queries from Western Canada.

SPREAD THE WORD

Share the website on all social media platforms. Use your voice to amplify this message. Encourage your friends, family, and acquaintances to do the same. The more people who are aware of this investigation the greater the impact it will have.

ENGAGE IN CONVERSATIONS

Initiate discussions in social circles, workplace, and community. Encourage open dialogues where people can express their opinions and concerns. By fostering conversations, you help raise awareness and understanding of the issue. Some people have not woken up to the long-term family issues.

CONTACT LOCAL MEDIA

Reach out to local newspapers, radio stations, and TV channels. Share the investigation and it’s significance with journalists and reporters who cover constitutional breaches. They may find this story newsworthy, helping the story reach a broader audience or they may be part of the political landscape.

CONTACT YOUR REPRESENTATIVES

Get in touch with your local political representatives, whether at the municipal, provincial, or federal level. Share the concerns and ask them to take a stand on the matter and advocate for our rights and freedoms.

JOIN OR SUPPORT ADVOCACY GROUPS

Connect with advocacy groups, magazines, (highly recommended, Ontario Landowners Voices) organizations, or individuals who champion people’s rights and freedoms. In this case the control of we the people.

REMEMBER

Every voice matters, and your active involvement can be the catalyst for positive change. STAND UP PATRIOTS or fade away.

Torts – Nature of Tort Law and Liability ? 1

By: Edwin Durbin, B.Comm., LL.B., LL.M. of the Ontario Bar 1

ABOUT CLASS ACTIONS – WHAT YOU SHOULD KNOW

CONSUMERS’ POWER IN NUMBERS

As consumers, when we purchase products or services from companies, we have a reasonable expectation that those products and services are not defective, will not cause us harm, and that we will be treated fairly. When these same companies fail to meet their obligations, it is your right as a consumer to hold them accountable for the financial or physical harm they cause to compensate victims and to discourage similar business practices from occurring in the future.

However, a lone consumer is often powerless against a giant company, and, therefore, individuals’ rights are sometimes disregarded by powerful corporations. A class action lawsuit may be the only avenue to compensate victims of corporate wrongdoing.

NO COSTS TO PARTICIPATE

In class actions, the burden of the costs is almost always covered by the lawyers. In almost all cases, all legal fees are on a contingency fee basis, which means that counsel fees and disbursements are only awarded to the lawyers if the class action is successful, as a percentage of the amount awarded to the class from a judgment or a settlement.

The Fonds d’aide aux recours collectif in Quebec and the Class Proceedings Committee in Ontario may accept to advance certain funds related to the class action and to protect against a negative cost award. This can prove useful to help the lawyers prosecute the class action on behalf of the class.

NO RISK IF UNSUCCESSFUL

If a class action fails, class members do not pay any legal fees or expenses to class counsel and, therefore, there is no risk. On the contrary, when an individual takes legal action and it fails, that person must pay such fees, which could be significant, from their own pockets.

ACCESSIBILITY TO JUSTICE

Due to the financing by lawyers and governmental organizations and the limitation of risk, class actions grant citizens greater access to justice. Most individuals would not otherwise be able to assume the costs of such major litigation on their own.

THE ROLE OF THE LEAD PLAINTIFF

The lead plaintiff is the person who addresses the Court in the name of the other members that he or she wishes to represent. If the Court certifies the class action, this person becomes the class representative.

The lead plaintiff’s role is to present his or her situation to class counsel and give his or her lawyer the mandate to initiate a class action. A written agreement is then signed in which it is agreed that neither he, she, nor the class members assume any financial obligation, nor any costs if the class action fails.

The lead plaintiff should help in the preparation of the legal proceedings by providing the information and documents concerning his or her individual situation. The lead plaintiff should also be available to accompany the lawyer to Court for the certification hearing, as well as, any possible discovery.

The lead plaintiff is supported by the lawyer at every step of the way.

CASE LAW – SUBJECT TO LEGAL ADVICE

The cases below appear to the Tait family of Laymen to apply to the Watershed Debacle.

https://www.osler.com/en/resources/regulations/2021/supreme-court-of-canada-revisits-the-law-of-government-liability-in-

negligence https://www.younganderson.ca/images/seminar_blogs/Nuisance_Negligence_and_the_Canada_Line-FM-JT.pdf

THE TORT LAW DEFINITIONS

The Tort Law definitions below may be reviewed by potential plaintiffs.

DECEIT

DEF: Deceit suggests malevolence, or simply, a negative intent.

RELEVANCE: The control of private landowner’s property.

FRAUD BY OMISSION

DEF: A person can perpetrate a fraud through the omission of a material fact. For this reason, when alleging fraud, a plaintiff may allege that the defendant made “a misrepresentation or a material omission of fact. which was false and known to be false.”

RELEVANCE: The omission of information that ultimately caused the landowner loss of equity with the infringement of the watershed study.

INFO ONLY: FYI – CASE LAW FRAUD BY OMISSION

Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit.

BREACH OF TRUST

This applies to the Watershed Negligence.

FRAUDULENT MISREPRESENTATION

DEF: If successful in an action for misrepresentation, the court will reward damages to compensate for losses the plaintiff suffered because of the representation. If exceptionally outrageous, the court may also award additional punitive damages to the plaintiff for fraudulent misrepresentation.

RELEVANCE: Denial of access to information resulting in actual watershed equity losses to landowners.

MISREPRESENTATION

Misrepresentation is a false or misleading statement or a material omission which renders other statements misleading, with intent to deceive.

CRIMINAL CODE MUNICIPAL CORRUPTION 123

criminal-code municipal-corruption-123

WHAT IS CANADIAN TORT LAW ?

Canadian Tort Law holds anyone liable who causes damage to you or your property. Its primary function is to compensate people who have suffered a loss or an injury. Everyone has a legal duty to uphold the law. A tort claim is made when someone breaches that legal duty.

WHAT ARE THE 3 POINTS TO PROVE IN TORT LAW?

To win a tort case, there are 3 elements that must be established in a claim: The defendant had a legal duty to act in a certain way. The defendant breached this duty by failing to act appropriately, and. The plaintiff suffered injury or loss as a direct result of the defendant’s breach.

In this watershed case all points to prove are met.

FYI – TORT LAW VS COMMON LAW

DEF: In Canada, tort law is primarily based on common law principles, developed through court decisions and legal precedence. The most important difference is that common law torts are fragmented, encompassing several different torts such as negligence, assault, trespass, nuisance, and more.

WHAT ARE THE ELEMENTS OF TORT LAW IN CANADA?

In the country’s common law provinces, a tort consists of a wrongful acts or injury that lead to physical, emotional, or financial damage to a person in which another person could be held legally responsible.

In this watershed case wrongful acts by officials in their negligence have caused physical, emotional and massive financial damage to plaintiffs

IS TORT LAW CIVIL LAW IN CANADA?

In common law, a tort is a civil wrong for which a legal remedy exists. The wrong relates to harm or losses occurring to a person or their property because of deliberate action or carelessness of another, and forms the basis of the claim by the plaintiff in most civil legal claims.

In this watershed case the failure of officials to advise landowners of the potential massive losses is so obviously careless that this inaction appears deliberate.

Identifying the Four Tort Elements:

The accused had a duty, in most personal injury cases, to act in a way that did not cause you to become injured. The accused committed a “breach” of that duty. An injury occurred to you. The breach of duty was the proximate cause of your injury.

In this watershed case the financial injuries in losses are massive as a result of the breach of trust by the authorities in their failure to assess potential obvious losses and officially notify the plaintiffs with proper documented assessments. This is shown by the lack of a tax reduction.

JUST A NOTE: TO ALL PROSPECTIVE PLAINTIFFS

In the English law of tort, professional negligence is a subset of the general rules on negligence to cover the situation in which the defendant has represented him or herself as having more than average skills and abilities of properties

a duty of care is owed by the defendant to the claimant and that the defendant is in a breach of that duty.

The standard test of breach is whether the defendant has matched the abilities of a reasonable person. But, by virtue of the services they offer and supply, professional people hold themselves out as having more than average abilities.

This specialized set of rules determines the standards against which to measure the legal quality of the services actually delivered by those who claim to be among the best in their fields of expertise.

The watershed issue holds out both the Planning Corporations and their individual professional representatives as defendants.

JUST A NOTE: HOW ARE ONTARIO PROPERTY TAXES CALCULATED?

How are property taxes calculated? Property taxes are calculated using the Current Value Assessment of a property, as determined by the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), and multiplying it by the combined municipal and education tax rates for the applicable class of property. The tax assessment .

The usual rules rely on establishing that a duty of care is owed by the defendant to the claimant and that the defendant is in a breach of that duty.

The watershed issue holds out the Mayor and the councilors and the Planning Corporations along with their professional representatives as defendants for the losses incurred based on the amount. of the losses calculated on the difference between the amount incurred before and after the watershed implementation. Where is that report and the new assessment? Not knowing is not a defence.

TORT NEGLIGENCE (SEE THE “STORY PAGE” ACCOUNTABILITY)

When The evidence shows that a lacuna in a professional practice exists by which risks of grave danger are knowingly taken, then, however small the risk, the court must anxiously examine that lacuna, particularly if the risk can be easily and inexpensively avoided. If the court finds, on an analysis of the reasons given for not taking those precautions that, in the light of current professional knowledge, there is no proper basis for the lacuna, and that it is definitely not reasonable that those risks should have been taken. It is a function to state that fact. Where it is necessary to state that it constitutes negligence, the practice will no doubt thereafter be altered to the benefit of patients/claimants.

TORT LAW

The 3 elements of Tort Law ?

To win a tort case, there are 3 elements that must be established in a claim: the defendant had a legal duty to act in a certain way, The defendant breached this duty by failing to act appropriately, and the plaintiff suffered injury or loss as a direct result of the defendant’s breach.

BILL OF RIGHTS

(1) Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada. (2) Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right: to move to and take up residence in any province, and to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.

CONSTITUTION ART 21

The right to livelihood is a part of the right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution and as interpreted by the same court, right to livelihood adds meaning to sustain life with dignity. It is closely mixed up with the right to life the snatching a person of the right to livelihood is denying him the right to live

CANADIAN TORT LAW

What are the different types of loss in tort law? loss In tort, all losses within 3 categories: (1) physical/property damage; (2) economic loss consequent on physical damage (i.e. consequential economic loss); (3) pure economic loss.

Canadian tort law is composed of two parallel systems: a common law framework outside Québec and a civil law framework within Québec. Outside Québec, Canadian tort law originally derives from that of England and Wales but has developed distinctly since Canadian Confederation in 1867 and has been influenced by jurisprudence in other common law jurisdictions. Meanwhile, while private law as a whole in Québec was originally derived from that which existed in France at the time of Québec’s annexation into the British Empire, it was overhauled and codified first in the Civil Code of Lower Canada and later in the current Civil Code of Quebec, which codifies most elements of tort law as part of its provisions on the broader law of obligations. As most aspects of tort law in Canada are the subject of provincial jurisdiction under the Canadian Constitution, tort law varies even between the country’s common law provinces and territories.

In the country’s common law provinces, a tort consists of a wrongful acts or injury that lead to physical, emotional, or financial damage to a person in which another person could be held legally responsible.^[1] The two main subcategories of tort law are intentional torts and unintentional torts. Similarly in Québec, there are four conditions necessary for a finding of civil liability under the CCQ:^[2]—–

Imputability: The capacity of a tortfeasor to “discern right from wrong”, and to understand the consequences of their actions.

Fault: The failure of a tortfeasor to act as “a normally prudent and reasonable person” would have in similar circumstances.

Damage: Harm or injury suffered by the plaintiff.

Causation: A causal link between the fault of the tortfeasor and the damage incurred by the plaintiff.

The defendant in a tort suit is called the tortfeasor, and most often, financial compensation is what tort victims acquire.^[3] All torts require proof of fault in order to determine legal responsibility, however, fault is measured differently for the different types of tort.^[3] There are criminal code offences in Canada that could also qualify as tort law under common law. However, most victims do not sue those who are criminally charged since the accused do not have the financial means to pay back the victim or because the accused is incarcerated.^[4]

NEGLIGENCE SUMMARY

Many people have an intuitive understanding of the meaning of the term negligence. Legally, it requires an act that a reasonable person would know could cause harm to the person who was harmed. It is accidental harm as opposed to intentional harm, and in many cases people act knowing that there is a risk but no harm is done. However, when our actions that have the potential to injure a person or their property do in fact cause such a result, we may be liable for repairing that harm through an award of monetary damages. This is the fundamental compensatory purpose of the law of negligence.

Negligence in the case of the Tait Family Property resulted in serious losses.

NEGLIGENCE

Negligence is a cause of action leading to relief designed to protect legal rights^[a] from actions which, although unintentional, nevertheless cause some form of legal harm to the plaintiff. In the common law provinces, there are four elements of negligence required for a particular course of conduct to be considered tortious:^[10]

Duty: The purported tortfeasor must owe the plaintiff a duty of care, something which may arise from a variety of different factors such as the nature of a situation (e.g. a person driving a vehicle or engaging in some other foreseeably risky activity owes a duty to individuals reasonably likely to be injured such as pedestrians) or the relationship between the parties (e.g. a doctor and a patient).

Breach: The conduct complained of must constitute a breach of the standard of care associated with the aforementioned duty. Typically this means that the court will employ a reasonable person standard in assessing whether or not the respondent’s actions were negligent.

Damage: The plaintiff must have suffered damage.

Causation: The conduct complained of must either be the proximate cause or the cause in fact of the damage suffered by the plaintiff. In the former case, the respondent’s conduct is the proximate cause of the damage if it could have been reasonably foreseen. In the latter case, the conduct is the cause in fact of the damage suffered by the plaintiff if the damage would not have occurred but for the respondent’s conduct.

In the common law provinces, courts have restricted the types of damage for which a plaintiff may seek monetary compensation. For instance, pure economic loss may only lead to monetary compensation in a limited set of circumstances established by precedent; at present, these are 1) negligent misrepresentation or performance of a service, 2) negligent supply of shoddy goods or structures, and 3) relational economic loss between parties to a contract.^[11][12] Even where a plaintiff demonstrates that the conduct complained of falls within the circumstances in which pure economic loss may be recovered, they must demonstrate that they were in a “sufficiently proximate relationship” with the respondent.^[12] Prior to the ruling in Cooper v. Hobart in 2001, this analysis was grounded in mere foreseeability of injury; however, following the ruling, both the proximity of the parties’ relationship and foreseeability of injury must be proved.^[12] Per the ruling in Cooper, courts in the common law province apply a two-step analytical framework based on the Anns test previously applied in England and Wales under which a court will award damages for pure economic loss where the conduct falls within the established categories established by present and, if the conduct does not fall into any established category, will then proceed to examine public policy reasons for and against the recognition of a new duty of care.^[11]

PROPERTY TORTS

Property torts are civil causes of action aimed at seeking damages for interference with a plaintiff’s property, including both immovable property and movable property or chattel. The most significant torts within this category are the two categories of trespass to property:

EXPROPRIATION

Google: Expropriation – Canada

Note: Expropriation is similar, but not the Watershed issue in whole.

Note: Expropriated landowners are entitled to fair compensation; this compensation should make them “whole” – that is, fully compensate them for all losses arising

Expropriation is the government’s exercise of its right to acquire land from landowners for a public purpose – for example, to build roads, Light Rail Transit projects, schools, etc. The Supreme Court of Canada has stated that expropriation is one of the ultimate exercises of governmental authority.

https://unifiedllp.com/10-things-to-know-about-expropriation/

https://www.fillmoreriley.com/publication/expropriation-revisited-supreme-court-of-canada-clarifies-law-in-constructive-taking-land-claims

GENERALLY

In general, anyone whose actions or omissions cause financial harm to another person or entity may be held accountable for the resulting losses under tort law.

In tort law, anyone who commits a tort (a civil wrong) that causes financial losses to another person or entity may be held accountable for those losses.

WHO IS HELD ACCOUNTABLE

individuals, businesses, organizations, and even government entities.

For example, if a business owner’s negligence causes a customer to suffer financial losses, the business owner may be held accountable for those losses in a tort claim. Similarly, if a government entity’s actions cause a citizen to suffer financial losses, the government entity may be held accountable for those losses in a tort claim.

It’s important to note that in order for someone to be held accountable for financial losses in a tort claim, it must be shown that their actions were the direct cause of those losses. Additionally, the plaintiff (the person or entity seeking compensation for the losses) must be able to prove the amount of financial losses they have suffered, and that those losses were a result of the defendant’s actions.

FYI: IS CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT MONEY TAXABLE IN CANADA?

The tax treatment of class action lawsuit money varies depending on the nature of the compensation. Typically, compensatory damages for personal injuries are non-taxable, while punitive damages and other components related to business claims may be subject to taxation.

CLASS ACTION INFO

The court will only grant certification if it is satisfied that the following conditions apply:

Proceeding as a class action is preferable to other available legal remedies

The plaintiffs have a lawful claim against the defendant

Significant value lost due to negligence in “Duty of Care”

A specific class of affected persons can be identified

Watershed affected landowners

The members of the class share common questions of fact or law

Persons in authority failed to protect citizens

A representative plaintiff can be identified among the class members

John Tait – Named as the lead plaintiff

DISCLAIMER

Interpretation

The words of which the initial letter is capitalized have meanings defined under the following conditions.
The following definitions shall have the same meaning regardless of whether they appear in singular or in plural.

Definitions

For the purposes of this Disclaimer:

Company (referred to as either “the Company”, “We”, “Us” or “Our” in this Disclaimer) refers to Watershed Debacle.

Service refers to the Website.

You means the individual accessing the Service, or the company, or other legal entity on behalf of which such individual is accessing or using the Service, as applicable.

Website refers to Watershed Debacle, accessible from https://www.watersheddebacle.ca

Disclaimer

The information contained on the Service is for general information purposes only.

The Company assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions in the contents of the Service.

In no event shall the Company be liable for any special, direct, indirect, consequential, or incidental damages or any damages whatsoever, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tort, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Service or the contents of the Service. The Company reserves the right to make additions, deletions, or modifications to the contents on the Service at any time without prior notice. This Disclaimer has been created with the help of the Terms Feed Disclaimer Generator.

The Company does not warrant that the Service is free of viruses or other harmful components.

External Links Disclaimer

The Service may contain links to external websites that are not provided or maintained by or in any way affiliated with the Company.

Please note that the Company does not guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of any information on these external websites.

Errors and Omissions Disclaimer

The information given by the Service is for general guidance on matters of interest only. Even if the Company takes every precaution to insure that the content of the Service is both current and accurate, errors can occur. Plus, given the changing nature of laws, rules and regulations, there may be delays, omissions or inaccuracies in the information contained on the Service.

The Company is not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained from the use of this information.

Fair Use Disclaimer

The Company may use copyrighted material which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The Company is making such material available for criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, or research.

The Company believes this constitutes a “fair use” of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the United States Copyright law.

If You wish to use copyrighted material from the Service for your own purposes that go beyond fair use, You must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Views Expressed Disclaimer

The Service may contain views and opinions which are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any other author, agency, organization, employer or company, including the Company.

Comments published by users are their sole responsibility and the users will take full responsibility, liability and blame for any libel or litigation that results from something written in or as a direct result of something written in a comment. The Company is not liable for any comment published by users and reserves the right to delete any comment for any reason whatsoever.

No Responsibility Disclaimer

The information on the Service is provided with the understanding that the Company is not herein engaged in rendering legal, accounting, tax, or other professional advice and services. As such, it should not be used as a substitute for consultation with professional accounting, tax, legal or other competent advisers.

In no event shall the Company or its suppliers be liable for any special, incidental, indirect, or consequential damages whatsoever arising out of or in connection with your access or use or inability to access or use the Service.

“Use at Your Own Risk” Disclaimer

All information in the Service is provided “as is”, with no guarantee of completeness, accuracy, timeliness or of the results obtained from the use of this information, and without warranty of any kind, express or implied, including, but not limited to warranties of performance, merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.

The Company will not be liable to You or anyone else for any decision made or action taken in reliance on the information given by the Service or for any consequential, special or similar damages, even if advised of the possibility of such damages.

DISCLAIMER 3

All matters herein, are subject to Legal Review.