https://www.facebook.com/168782186313589/

Stave Falls News, Pilgrim Street, Mission City, BC (2025)

02/19/2025

Ryan finished strong hitting hard that the onus is on the plaintiffs to prove there is no defense.

He also talked a lot about the plaintiffs having to provide evidence that the statements made are not true. A denial is not enough.

Justice Francis asked questions about both concepts. She was definitely listening and taking a lot of notes.

The defense had last word but it was not about what had been said earlier. He challenged the right to use the defense of justification because it had not been included in the application legal basis.

He also provided a case about how strong the evidence he had to supply needed to be.

Justice Francis had reserved judgment saying we will have a decision as soon as possible.

Ryan's performance was EXCELLENT. He showed a much better command of the details of the case.

02/19/2025

At the morning break.

Ryan is reading case law and backing up his statements with specific examples.

Major points being driven home include:

Defendants actually defended the plaintiffs in many cases especially Diana and Courtney making it an open dialogue.

Context matters in individual threads but you cannot take isolated threads and say that the context of those amount to defamation.

The plaintiffs in many posts were asked to supply information and when they did not that in some way lead to more hyperbolic comments. Not sure I followed the logic there but he was working case law that seemed to suggest that made the comments less likely to be defamatory.

The posts complained of actually preceded the cease and decist letters and the defendants did actually comply by stopping their alleged defamatory comments.

When asked to delete all posts about the SGCA ..... GOING BACK IN

02/18/2025

Anti-SLAPP Hearing Part V

Day 4 - When and Where

Short Answer:

Wednesday 19, 2025 court room 32
Place: Vancouver courthouse
starting: 10 am for 2 hours
In front of: Justice Francis

02/18/2025

Feb. 18 Hearings – How did that go?

Short answer:

I got my ass kicked to the tune of $3,000.

Long Answer

I was not happy to hear today’s applications would be heard by Justice Ball. I mentioned earlier that today could be a bit expensive for someone. When we were scheduled to be heard by Justice Ball I figured that someone would probably be me.

The Plaintiffs had asked for a strong message to keep me from bringing any more legal action. He felt that the $12,000 being asked was maybe too strong a message. When he asked me what I thought would be meaningful amount I suggested $3,000 and he ordered costs to be paid to the Plaintiffs in that amount within 45 days.

As I expected he was unhappy to see me back in court and again told me to stop wasting the court’s time. I had hope for someone who would listen to my arguments as to why I had made all those applications. It never got that far. I did manage to tell him that I had standing to set aside the shutdown order and read him the rule. He considered that for a bit and then said but that rule is for urgent matters. Where’s the urgency? That was as close as I got to making a single point.

He is correct that without notice applications are supposed to be for urgent matters. I tried to tell him he had granted an order without notice which was not urgent. His response was that was a year ago so where’s the urgency now? He definitely was not having any argument.

That pretty much ends my legal actions on this file because he also approved an order that I could bring no further action against the Plaintiffs without court approval.

I'll check on the status of the Anti-SLAPP hearing scheduled for tomorrow and let you know shortly.

02/12/2025

An Abundance of Riches – Part III

What is a Deed?

Short Answer:

In the context of a community foundation a Deed is simply a contract between the donor and the foundation.

Long Answer:

This was much simpler than I expected it to be because a deed is just a contract between the donor and the foundation. It spells out the details of how the funds being given to the foundation are to be administered and spent.

Although the BC Foundations are governed by the BC Societies Act the act does not spell out the definition of a Deed. Like all contracts in BC they are defined by Common law and the Law of Equity Act of BC.

Here is the format of a DEED generated by AI and abbreviated slightly by me:

This document formalizes the transfer of assets and ensures the foundation adheres to any donor restrictions.

DEED OF GIFT

THIS AGREEMENT is made this ___ day of ________, 2025, by and between:
1. DONOR
[Full Name of Donor]
…
2. RECIPIENT (COMMUNITY FOUNDATION)
[Full Legal Name of Foundation]
…
3. GIFT DETAILS
WHEREAS the Donor wishes to contribute the following gift to the Foundation:
• Description of Gift: [e.g., $50,000 CAD, …]
• Purpose of Gift: [e.g., "to establish the [Name] Endowment Fund to support … ."]
• Special Conditions (if any): [e.g., "Income from the gift shall be used exclusively for …."]
4. TERMS & CONDITIONS
1. Ownership & Control
o The Foundation acknowledges receipt of the gift and agrees to hold and administer it in accordance with its policies and applicable laws.
o The gift is irrevocable and shall become the sole property of the Foundation.
2. Fund Management
o The Foundation shall invest and administer the gift in accordance with its investment policies and the Trustee Act (BC).
o If the purpose of the gift becomes impracticable, the Foundation may apply the gift to a similar charitable purpose, consistent with the original intent of the Donor.
3. Recognition
o The Foundation may recognize the Donor publicly unless the Donor requests anonymity.
4. Charitable Tax Receipt
o The Foundation will issue an official tax receipt in accordance with the Income Tax Act (Canada).
5. SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Deed of Gift as of the date first written above.
DONOR:
________________________________________
[Name of Donor]
FOUNDATION REPRESENTATIVE:
________________________________________
[Authorized Representative]
[Title]

It really is that simple. Up Next not sure but maybe a proposal specific to Stave Falls. BUT before that we should probably circle back to the post about pros and cons to fill in some numbers.

I will be off for a few days celebrating Family Day. Happy Family day Week-end to you all! Hug someone.

02/11/2025

An Abundance of Riches – Part II

What does the Mission Community Foundation do?

Short answer:

They accept donations of money about $12,000,000 since 1987. They invest that money.

They use the returns to give money back to the community in the form of scholarships and grants totaling about $500,000 in fiscal 2023.

Long answer:

There have been a number of ideas floating around in our community for how best to use the SGCA money. Some of them mention the Mission Community Foundation (MCF) so I want to take a look at what they actually do and how they do it. I will also take a look at some of the options for the SGCA to get involved.

The Mission Community Foundation (MCF) was founded in 1987. They manage about $12,000,000 (2023 financials) up from $8,000,000 in 2022.

From the Annual report for 2023 it looks like about $500,000 in grants and scholarships was given out:
$104,500 in scholarships from about 60 benefactors
$165,600 in grants from about 40 benefactors.
$216,000 in grants from Federal Government and the Community Foundation of Canada.

You can read all about those benefactors, the funds they have set up and the annual reports going back many years at: https://www.missioncommunityfoundation.org

The way it works is:
Someone who wants the MCF to manage their assets defines a Funds and then endows that fund with a certain amount of money. The Fund defines what is to be done with the money in what is called a deed. For example, a fund could be for scholarships for students who live in Stave Falls. It could be even more general and say that investment returns are for the operation of the SGCA.

Next I will take a look at “Deeds” in this context and what may and may not be possible in what sounds like a contract between the donor and the foundation.

02/08/2025

Are you a Party or do you have Standing?

Short Answer:

I have standing in the case where Beland, Cowan, Keys and Keys sued the SGCA to have it shut down because of a rule that says:
if a court order is granted without giving notice, then anyone affected by that order can challenge it (Rule 8-5(1)) so I had standing to challenge the shutdown order.

I was also trying to get sufficient standing to file a counterclaim on behalf of the SGCA.

Long Answer:

Gemma, on the previous post, commented:

I appreciate your continued journey in all of this debacle…there was a statement made on another page “Johan was never recognized by the court to have standing in this case.”

Is this incorrect? I believe as I have been following you had requested to be a John Doe ? So able to speak up in court?
I told her I would elaborate so here is that elaboration.

The difference between being a “Party” and having standing is a bit subtle.

I really am getting quite fond of my AI buddies so I asked:

In BCSC what is the difference between being a party and having standing?

CoPilot's answer to what a Party is was inadequate but it’s definition of standing was pretty good:

… To have standing, a person must demonstrate that they have a sufficient connection to and harm from the law or action challenged to support that person's participation in the case. Essentially, it means that the person has a legitimate interest in the outcome of the case and is affected by it.

ChatGPT’s answer for standing was not great but the other half was pretty good:
A party to an action is someone who is formally named in a lawsuit. The main types of parties in a civil action are:
• Plaintiff: The person or entity bringing the lawsuit.
• Defendant: The person or entity being sued.
• Third Party (in some cases): Someone brought into the lawsuit by the defendant if they believe this third party is responsible for the claim. …

They both left out a number of Parties but they are not applicable to this case yet.

John Does are technically parties because they are named in the lawsuit. They do not automatically have standing until their identity is confirmed and they are linked to the legal dispute. Once a John Doe is identified, they step into the case fully, assuming all rights and responsibilities of a party.

They both incorrectly stated that Parties have to abide by court orders where in fact everybody has to be abide by a court order even if they are not involved in the action.

I also checked Mistral since it has been in the news lately. It was REALLY useless on this one.

The gist of it is that a party has broader rights to participate.

In a response to one of my applications file Feb. 12, 2024 the Plaintiffs stated:

“To the extent that the plaintiffs’ application before Justice Ball was brought “without notice” pursuant to Rule 8-5(1), a person affected by the order may apply to change or set aside the order in accordance with Rule 8-5(8). If Mr. Nielsen is a person affected by the November 1, 2023 Order, his standing in these proceedings is limited to remedies he might seek under 8-5(8).”

On Dec. 29, 2023 when the Plaintiffs retained legal counsel, they filed a document which actually included me as a “Third Party”.

This is not correct in legal terms but it is in the English meaning of the phrase. It happened on a number of my applications because it is the only way to get another name on the form one has to fill out. That confused me for a while but I know better now.

02/04/2025

What can happen after discontinuance? Part I.

Short answer:

Apparently quite a lot including hearings for irregularities and costs as we have seen in the former board of the SGCA lawsuit to shutdown the SGCA. And maybe even an application for vexatious litigation which has been filed against myself.

Long answer

Let’s start with a few basics of how civil claims work in BC Supreme Court:

I will use the shutdown lawsuit as an example and just call it “this case”.

Starting the Lawsuit:

A lawsuit is started with a Notice of Civil Claim (NOCC). It is started by the Plaintiff(s). The Plaintiffs must “serve” it on the Defendant(s). The defendants must respond within 21 day. If they do not the plaintiffs may proceed to default judgement. I.e. proceed without the defendants present.

The Defendants and the Plaintiffs are “Parties” to the action.
A Third party may be added by the defendants if they feel the fault lies with the third party rather than themselves in which case the Third Parties also become Parties. There is also a court rule that says any person may apply to the court to become a party.

For example: In this case the plaintiffs are Beland, Cowan, Keys and Keys. The defendant is the SGCA. The NOCC was filed on Oct. 23, 2023. The SGCA never filed a response. I made applications to try to become a “Party” and be allowed to defend the SGCA.

In order to get into court at all there must be a NOCC. Once that is on file then its file number is used on all future actions. One of the most common actions is an application.

The Application Process:

An application is started by filing a Notice of Application (NOA). Anyone who is Party to the action can file an NOA. NOA’s ask the court to do something in a section entitled “Orders Sought”. It includes a date on which a hearing will be held in front of a Justice who will decide whether to:

1. Grant the orders sought

2. Dismiss the application in which case it is ended and cannot be brought back, OR

3. Adjourn the application to another date or generally meaning the applicant has to “reset” the hearing for another day.

The person making the application is the Applicant and the person served is the Respondent. i.e. we no longer talk about Plaintiff or Defendant.

The NOA must be served on the respondent 8 days before the hearing. If the Applicant fails to serve then the Respondents can tell the judge they were not properly served and have the Application adjourned or dismissed.

In exceptional circumstances like restraining orders, wire taps and urgent time sensitive matters application can proceed Without Notice (WON) on what is called an Ex Parte application i.e. without serving anyone.

In this case the Plaintiffs filed an application on Oct. 26, 2023 seeking an order to shut down the SGCA. They did it on an EX Parte basis so the application was heard the same day. Justice Taylor dismissed the application but on Nov. 1, 2023 The Plaintiffs reset the application to be heard (again Ex Parte) and Justice Ball granted the Application.

On Nov. 9. 20223 I filed the first of several applications to try to get the order set aside. Court rules say that a person affected by an Ex Parte order may apply to the court to have the order “set aside” i.e. cancelled.

How is an Order Set Aside:

An order can disappear in a number of ways: It can be ordered to be set aside by a justice. However because it is tethered to the NOCC it can also disappear by the discontinuance of the NOCC.

On Nov. 9 I filed my first application to have the order of Justice Ball set aside. I had trouble serving documents on the Plaintiffs so I made a successful application to be allowed to serve by email. That finally got a court date where the Plaintiffs could not claim they had not been served.

On Feb. 6, 2024 the Plaintiffs discontinued their claim against the SGCA by filing a Notice of Discontinuance (NOD). The NOD cancels all outstanding applications and any orders made so my application to set aside the order was not heard.

What happened after Discontinuance:

The Plaintiffs and myself both made applications to “correct an irregularity”. I filed an application for costs after discontinuance and the Plaintiffs filed an application to have me declared a vexatious litigant. Hearings for both of the later two are scheduled for Feb 18, 2025 so there is lots of time to get into the details.

So more about that later.

Fun Fact:

In Canada, the record for the most snowfall in a single day is 145 centimeters (4.75 feet), recorded at Tahtsa Lake in British Columbia's Coast Mountains on February 11, 1999.

02/02/2025

An abundance of Riches Part I

What to do with the money:

Short answer:

Money is the root of all evil.

This not really a suggestion of what to do but rather a look at one option comparing it to GIC's

Long Answer

I have been thinking about how much discord our money has caused in the community. I have been asking myself how can we prevent the money from dominating so many aspects of our association. How can we get back to focusing on strong committees doing good work in our community?

You may recall:

1. it was to protect the money from being spent on legal fees that the former board managed to shut down the SGCA for up to 3 years.
2. It was accusations of mismanagement of that money that led to the FBOD suing 16 members of our community. and
3. A proposal by the FBOD to Mission city to put a concrete building on parkland next to the school involved that money that brought out so many community members in opposition that the FBOD was voted out of office.

I you have attended any recent meetings you have seen the result of this discord which I suggest comes from an abundance of riches.

I am not a big fan of AI but it has been on my mind a lot lately and I have been experimenting to understand its limitations. Following is a discussion with ChatGPT about sending the money to a foundation for management. I initially tried copilot but it’s answer was woefully inadequate. Judge for your self what GPT is suggesting.

The question including lots of typos:

WRite me a short article explaining the pros and cons of the Stave Gardens sommunity association (SGCA) giving a quarter million dollars to a non profit like the perhaps suggest a couple of other fioundations like the vancouver foundation as alteernativesthe Mission foundation to be managed such that the principal is protected and the interest retyurned to the SGCA each year for operating or cholarships as the membership sees fit. compare these pros and cons to investing the money in GIC's

ChatGPT responded:

Weighing the Options: SGCA’s $250,000 Investment Decision

The Stave Gardens Community Association (SGCA) is considering donating $250,000 to a nonprofit organization, such as the Vancouver Foundation or the Mission Foundation, to be managed as an endowment.

Under this arrangement, the principal would remain intact, and the SGCA would receive annual returns to support operating costs or scholarships. While this approach has benefits, it also comes with potential drawbacks, particularly when compared to investing in Guaranteed Investment Certificates (GICs).

Pros of Donating to a Foundation

1. Long-Term Stability – Foundations like the Vancouver Foundation or the Mission Foundation have experienced fund managers who invest wisely to ensure sustainable returns.

2. Potentially Higher Returns – Well-managed endowments often yield better long-term returns than traditional low-risk investments like GICs. This could mean more funding for SGCA initiatives.

3. Community Impact – Partnering with a nonprofit aligns with SGCA’s mission to support the broader community, potentially creating goodwill and enhancing its reputation.

4. Reduced Management Burden – The foundation would handle all investment decisions, relieving SGCA of the responsibility of managing financial assets.

Cons of Donating to a Foundation

1. Loss of Control – Once donated, the money belongs to the foundation, and SGCA may have limited influence over how the funds are managed.

2. Market Risks – While foundations generally aim for stable growth, investments are still subject to market fluctuations. There is no guaranteed return.

3. Administrative Fees – Foundations typically charge management fees, which could reduce the annual payout to SGCA.

Pros of Investing in GICs

1. Guaranteed Returns – GICs provide a fixed interest rate, ensuring a predictable income stream.

2. Principal Protection – Unlike market-based investments, GICs guarantee the original investment remains intact.

3. Full Control – SGCA retains ownership of the funds and can reinvest or withdraw as needed.

Cons of Investing in GICs

1. Lower Returns – GICs typically offer lower interest rates than well-managed endowments, limiting long-term growth.

2. Lack of Flexibility – Funds may be locked in for a specific term, restricting access if SGCA needs emergency funds.

Conclusion

The decision between donating to a foundation or investing in GICs depends on SGCA’s priorities. If the goal is long-term community impact and potentially higher returns, a foundation-managed endowment is a strong option. However, if SGCA values guaranteed returns, full control, and minimal risk, GICs may be the safer bet. A hybrid approach—splitting funds between both options—could also provide a balanced solution.

**end of AI response** I will always tell you when an article is primarily the result of AI.

Fun Fact: ChatGPT has an average of 123.5 million daily active users. Copilot has sat at around 20-30 million active users.

01/30/2025

Three hearings in February.

1. The last few hours of the anti-SLAPP application in the defamation case is scheduled for Feb. 19
2. My application for costs after discontinuance is scheduled for Feb 18
3. And a brand new one by the former board against me for vexatious litigation is also scheduled for Feb. 18

The Anti-SLAPP: You may recall that Ryan (counsel for the applicants/defendants) ran out of time a while back. They have now managed to find a court date to fit that in. I am not sure where but as the date gets closer I will keep you informed.

Application for costs: I have applied to the court for my costs, including punitive cost for an unspecified amount, to be awarded either to myself or to the SGCA in the action the former board of the SGCA (FBOD) took to shut down the SGCA and then discontinued. The response came back this week and they have entered a counterclaim against me for costs including punitive costs in the amount of $9,000.

Application against me for Vexatious Litigation (VL): This is a new application by the FBOD that I not be allowed to take any further legal action against the FBOD without court approval. It claims that I abused the courts in my efforts to have the shutdown order of Justice Ball set aside. It asks for $3,000 in costs.

Looks like it could be an expensive month for someone. I am just hoping it isn't me.

You will of course want to know what VL is and how costs work. I will give you that in great detail in later posts but for now I am a bit busy figuring out just what VL is and penning the response..

Fun Fact: I have been enjoying the clear night skies. Did you know that at least 5 planets are visible in the night sky without a telescope. Apparently this is not a common occurrence. The brightest one you see in the southwest is Venus. It looked like it was courting the moon a few hours after sunset. Throughout February the moon will be close to each of the other planets making astronomy buffs quite giddy. I am also told you can see substantial details with a small telescope including the ice cap on one of them and the moons of another.

01/23/2025

Summary January 2025

Kristina commented on SFC: I'm just so confused and would like to know what it's all about.

Short Answer

Nov 2, 2022 – AGM elects Beland, Cowan, Cooper, Keys , Keys , Reid, Wissman, Nielsen (the board)

Dec 19, 2022 – The board makes a presentation to Mission council. The proposal includes drawings of a concrete structure to be built on the parkland beside the school.

Jan to March 2023 – attendance at meetings goes from a handful to around 50 mostly because the membership does not agree with the presentation made to council without their approval. Meetings get chaotic. Criticism increases online.

Mar 2023 – mediation is attempted

Summer 2023 – Bylaw committee, including both sides, hammer out proposed new bylaws and ask the board to set a special resolution meeting to approve the bylaws. When the BOD does not call the meeting as quickly as some members of the committee would like they pressure the BOD on the Stave Falls Community Facebook Group (SFC) to call it which they do for Sept 27, 2023 (Sept 27 SRM).

Sept 18, 2023 - Defamation Lawsuit filed
By Colleen Beland, Greg Cowan, Birgit Keys and Brendan Keys (BOD)
against Courtney Cardy, Jim Taylor, Rhonda Davidson and Diana Wood-Hutchinson and 12 John Does (people who might get named later).

Sept 22, 2023 - BOD proposes to the membership that the SGCA should be shut down until the defamation lawsuit gets settled. They postpone the Sept 27 SRM but members hold the meeting anyway.

Sept 27, 2023 – new bylaws are passed and the BOD is voted out by about 75 people attending the meeting. The BOD refuses to recognize the validity of the meeting.

Nov. 1, 2023 – BOD go to court to ask for an order to shut down the SGCA Justice Ball grants the order.

Nov 15, 2023 – the BOD holds an AGM without informing the membership and elect themselves as the new BOD.

Nov 22, 2023 – BOD go back to court for another order to have themselves recognized as the only members and the legitimate board of the SGCA. Justice Verhoeven dismisses their application.

Feb 6, 2024 – BOD dismisses their Oct 23 lawsuit against the SGCA which effectively sets aside the shutdown order so the SGCA is back in business.

BOD calls and AGM for Mar 11 which results in the same board as was elected Nov. 1, 2023.

Long answer:

Nov 2, 2022 – AGM elects Beland, Cowan, Cooper, Keys , Keys , Reid, Wissman, Nielsen (the board)

Dec 19, 2022 – The board makes a presentation to Mission council. The proposal includes drawings of a very large concrete structure to be built on the parkland beside the school. The membership is not informed of the meeting until after it has happened and the final form of the proposal has not been discussed with the membership. This brings a lot of criticism and concern especially by close neighbours.

Jan to March 2023 – attendance at meetings goes from a handful to around 50. Members try to implement changes so they feel they are being heard by the board but the board fails to satisfy the members concerns. Meetings get chaotic. Criticism increases online.

Mar 2023 – board proposes mediation with 3 of the most vocal critics who tell the board the discussion needs to be with the community and not with only a few. A round table to be hosted by the Steelhead, for all members, is organized by Jim Taylor and he invites the board to try to resolve some issues but the board refuses to attend in favour of their own round table which they call for June. By this time Cooper, Wissman and Nielsen have resigned.

Summer 2023 – Bylaw committee, including both sides, hammer out proposed new bylaws and ask the board to set a special resolution meeting to approve the bylaws. When the BOD does not call the meeting as quickly as some members of the committee would like they pressure the BOD on the Stave Falls Community Facebook Group (SFC) to call it which they do for Sept 27, 2023 (Sept 27 SRM). Because it is a special resolution meeting Jeff takes the opportunity to add motions to replace the BOD. The BOD adds those motions to the agenda and sends it out to the membership.

Sept 18, 2023 Defamation Lawsuit filed
By Colleen Beland, Greg Cowan, Birgit Keys and Brendan Keys (BOD)
against Courtney Cardy, Jim Taylor, Rhonda Davidson and Diana Wood-Hutchinson and 12 John Does (people who might get named later).

Sept 22, 2023 BOD proposes to the membership that the SGCA should be shut down until the defamation lawsuit gets settled and says the Sept 27 meeting is postponed. They propose a Zoom meeting to vote on their proposal for Oct 5 but missing from the email list are a number of members even including one which was on the bylaw committee.

Facing the possibility that the association might get shut down in a zoom meeting with limited participation a number of people mostly from the bylaw committee decide the BOD has no right to cancel the Sept 27 SRM and decide to hold the meeting.

Sept 27, 2023 – new bylaws are passed and the BOD is voted out by about 75 people attending the meeting. They also vote to turn down the Sept 22 proposal to shut down the SGCA. An interim board (IBOD) is elected to implement the AGM already called by the BOD for Nov. 1, 2023. The BOD refuses to recognize the validity of the meeting.

Oct 23, 2023 – BOD as individuals sue the SGCA to shut it down without informing the membership or any one else (With Out Notice)

Oct 26, 2023 – BOD apply to the court Without Notice for a court order to shut down the SGCA – Justice Taylor Dismisses the application

Nov. 1, 2023 – BOD reset the dismissed application for another Without Notice hearing. Cowan telling Justice Ball that Justice Taylor told him to come back. Justice Ball grants the order to shut down the SGCA for up to 3 years or when the defamation lawsuit is settled.

An AGM attended by about 25 people acclaims a new board only hours after the shutdown order was granted.

Nov 9, 2023 – Nielsen files the first of a number of applications in court to try to have the shutdown order set aside.

Nov 15, 2023 – the BOD holds an AGM without informing the membership and elect themselves as the new BOD.

Nov 22, 2023 – BOD go back to court for another Without Notice application to have themselves recognized as the only members and the legitimate board of the SGCA. Justice Verhoeven dismisses their application.

Feb 6, 2024 – BOD discontinue their Oct 23 lawsuit against the SGCA which effectively cancels the shutdown order so the SGCA is back in business.

BOD calls and AGM for Mar 11 which results in the same board as was elected Nov. 1, 2023.

Jan 8, 2025 - 3 days in court for an anti-SLAPP application which ran out of time so will continue at some future date

Still outstanding are at least 2 or 3 Civil Resolution Tribunal hearings, the anti-SLAPP hearing and if that fails then the defamation case probably continues for several more years. There is also an application by Nielsen for costs resulting from the Oct 23 lawsuit to be heard toward the end of February.

Stave Falls News

02/19/2025

02/19/2025

02/18/2025

02/18/2025

02/12/2025

02/11/2025

02/08/2025

02/04/2025

02/02/2025

01/30/2025

01/23/2025

Address

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Category