This will not be a slam dunk for Murray Trachtenberg!
Tansi/Good Day Folks:
Sorry for being absent the past few days but I've been immersed preparing my Motion Brief (all twenty-one pages) in the MMF's defamation suit against metis_mom@hotmail.com (Vanessa Everton), Terry Belhumeur and I. Justice McCawley gave me until tomorrow to have it ready. On May 1, 2006 I'll be in Court before Her Honour debating Mr. Murray N. Trachtenberg.
Another very interesting trial set to begin shortly (April 24, 2006) will be "The Metis National Council Secretariat Inc. and Clement Chartier on behalf of the Metis National Council and the Metis National Council versus Yvon Dumont." Until recently Winnipeg lawyer Regan Thatcher was representing Mr. Dumont but withdrew from the case. He has been replaced by Mr. Anders Bruun a very experienced, skilled and respected litigator with Campbell Marr LLP (www.campbellmarr.com). If Mr. Trachtenberg thought he was going to be facing yet another self-represented Defendant he's sadly mistaken.
I'll be in Court Monday April 24, 2006 to bring you trial coverage - it's going to be a fascinating case. In the meantime here's Yvon Dumont's Amended Statement of Defence obtained from official Court records.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
File No. CI 05-01-42919
THE QUEEN'S BENCH
WINNIPEG CENTRE
(Expedited Action - Rule 20A)
BETWEEN:
METIS NATIONAL COUNCIL SECRETARIAT INC.
Plaintiff
- and -
W.YVON DUMONT
Defendant
__________________________________________________
AMENDED STATEMENT OF DEFENCE
__________________________________________________
Yvon Dumont
69 Ashbury Bay
Winnipeg Manitoba
Telephone: 338-9146
AMENDED STATEMENT OF DEFENCE
1. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 28 and 31 of the statement of claim.
2. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 1, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 25, 26, 27, 29 and 30 of the statement of claim.
3. The defendant has no knowledge in respect of the allegations contained in paragraphs 5 nad 6 of the statement of claim.
4. In response to paragraph 11 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that it was the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, which created an honorary position of Governor as otherwise stated under paragraph 10 of the Plaintiffs' statement of claim.
5. In further response to paragraph 11 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, created a position of Governor, not for itself, not for the plaintiffs herein, but for the "Metis Nation." The Metis Nation is the collective of all Metis people in Canada who share common culture and values, and while it includes in small part members of the governing members of the Metis National Council, it also includes many Metis who self-identify as Metis but who do not hold membership in any provincial Metis organization or in the Metis National Council.
6. In further response to paragraph 14 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that he never agreed with the "2 year clause" in question when accepting the position of Governor for the Metis Nation from the Plaintiffs.
7. In response to paragraph 15 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, it was the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, which proposed the stated terms of reference. The original terms of reference as stated, however, were not agreed to by the defendant.
8. In further response to paragraph 15 of the statement of claim, and in the alternative, if a contract existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and if it was a term of the contract that the defendant was not eligible to seek or hold political office for a periond of 2 years from the date he ceased to be Governor, which is not admitted but denied, the defendant states that the said clause is void as against public policy.
9. In further response to paragraph 15 of the statement of claim, and in the further alternative, if a contract existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and if it was a term of the contract that the defendant was not eligible to seek or hold political office for a period of 2 years from the date he ceased to be Governor, which is not admitted but denied, and if the entire 2 year clause is not void as against public policy, the defendant states that the portion of the said clause in respect of seeking political office in any of its governing members is void as against public policy.
10. In further response to paragraph 15 of the Statement of Claim, and in the further alternative, if a contract existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and if it was a term of the contract that the defendant was not eligible to seek or hold political office for a period of two years from the date he ceased to be Governor, which is not admitted but denied, and if the entire two year clause is not void as against public policy, and if the portion of the said clause and respective seeking political office in any of its governing members is not void as against public policy, the defendant states that he received no consideration for a material change to his employment contract, or in the alternative, if the defendant did receive consideration, his bargaining position as compared to that of his employer was such that an unequal power relationship existed between the two such that the defendant was not able to bargain freely and was in fact under duress, and the impugned terms of reference were and are unconscionable.
11. In response to paragraph 16 of the statement of claim, the defendant denies that he accepted the position of Governor on January 22, 2002. As the facts are, the defendant accepted from the Metis National Council as appointment as Governor of the Metis Nation on or about March, 1999 and began to receive remuneration therefore in or about January, 2000.
12. In further response to paragraph 16 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, any contract or agreement with the Plaintiffs was completed by January, 2000.
13. In response to paragraph 17 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, as the facts are, the Plaintiffs amended their terms of reference by deleting the 2 year clause and requiring only that the Governor must resign his position prior to announcing his candidacy for any Metis political office. It was the amended terms of reference that the defendant agreed to under his letter dated January 22nd, 2002 with the Metis National Council.
Particulars
The president of plaintiffs at the time of the alleged breach, Geral Morin, agreed on behalf of the Metis National Council to amend the clause respecting the prohibition from seeking political office by deleting the 2 year requirement and only providing that the defendant resign prior to declaring candidacy for such political office. This amended agreement was a consequence of the defendant not agreeing to a swearing-in ceremony in December, 2001 on account of the said clause. After the president of the Metis National Council agreed to amend the clause as aforesaid, the defendant accepted the amended terms of reference.
14. In response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, it was the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, with whom the defendant agreed to resign or be dismissed in the event the defendant chose to run for Metis political office. There was no breach of contract.
15. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim and in the alternative, the defendant states that if the contract was entered into with the plaintiff, and if the terms of contract included a 2 year clause, which is not admitted but denied, that the plaintiff waived the 2 year clause condition or acquiesced to the defendant seeking political office in the Manitoba Metis Federation Inc.
Particulars
The president of the plaintiff at the time of the alleged breach, Geral Morin, agreed by way of verbal communication to allow the defendant to seek office in the Manitoba Metis Federation Inc.
16. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, neither the plaintiffs not the Metis National Council suffered any damages. The defendant puts the plaintiffs to the strict proof of damages.
17. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, no damage has been caused to the position of governor of the Metis Nation. The defendant puts the plaintiffs to the strict proof of damages.
18. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, and in the alternative, and if damage was caused to the position of governor, which is not admitted but denied, the defendant states that any damages to the said office does not enure to the detriment of the plaintiffs. The defendant puts the plaintiffs to the strict proof of this particular damage.
19. In response to the statement of claim as a whole, the defendant states that the plaintiff nor the Metis National Council are not entitled to any damages.
20. In response to the statement of claim as a whole, the defendant states that he performed all of his duties and obligations as Governor of the Metis Nation and he was not unjustly enriched.
21. In further response to the statement of claim, as a whole, the defendant states that there is no basis in law, even if the 2 year clause was included in a contract, if the clause was not void as against public policy and if the contract was with the plaintiff herein, all of which is not admitted but denied, and if the defendant did breach the contract and if the clause was not waived, upon which an employee can be ordered to repay salary for which he performed his contractual duties.
June, 2005
Yvon Dumont
69 Ashbury Bay
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R2V 2T4
Telephone: 338-9146
TO: POSNER & TRACHTENBERG
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries Public
710 - 491 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3B 2E4
Fax: 944-8878
Sorry for being absent the past few days but I've been immersed preparing my Motion Brief (all twenty-one pages) in the MMF's defamation suit against metis_mom@hotmail.com (Vanessa Everton), Terry Belhumeur and I. Justice McCawley gave me until tomorrow to have it ready. On May 1, 2006 I'll be in Court before Her Honour debating Mr. Murray N. Trachtenberg.
Another very interesting trial set to begin shortly (April 24, 2006) will be "The Metis National Council Secretariat Inc. and Clement Chartier on behalf of the Metis National Council and the Metis National Council versus Yvon Dumont." Until recently Winnipeg lawyer Regan Thatcher was representing Mr. Dumont but withdrew from the case. He has been replaced by Mr. Anders Bruun a very experienced, skilled and respected litigator with Campbell Marr LLP (www.campbellmarr.com). If Mr. Trachtenberg thought he was going to be facing yet another self-represented Defendant he's sadly mistaken.
I'll be in Court Monday April 24, 2006 to bring you trial coverage - it's going to be a fascinating case. In the meantime here's Yvon Dumont's Amended Statement of Defence obtained from official Court records.
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
File No. CI 05-01-42919
THE QUEEN'S BENCH
WINNIPEG CENTRE
(Expedited Action - Rule 20A)
BETWEEN:
METIS NATIONAL COUNCIL SECRETARIAT INC.
Plaintiff
- and -
W.YVON DUMONT
Defendant
__________________________________________________
AMENDED STATEMENT OF DEFENCE
__________________________________________________
Yvon Dumont
69 Ashbury Bay
Winnipeg Manitoba
Telephone: 338-9146
AMENDED STATEMENT OF DEFENCE
1. The defendant admits the allegations contained in paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 28 and 31 of the statement of claim.
2. The defendant denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 1, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 25, 26, 27, 29 and 30 of the statement of claim.
3. The defendant has no knowledge in respect of the allegations contained in paragraphs 5 nad 6 of the statement of claim.
4. In response to paragraph 11 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that it was the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, which created an honorary position of Governor as otherwise stated under paragraph 10 of the Plaintiffs' statement of claim.
5. In further response to paragraph 11 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, created a position of Governor, not for itself, not for the plaintiffs herein, but for the "Metis Nation." The Metis Nation is the collective of all Metis people in Canada who share common culture and values, and while it includes in small part members of the governing members of the Metis National Council, it also includes many Metis who self-identify as Metis but who do not hold membership in any provincial Metis organization or in the Metis National Council.
6. In further response to paragraph 14 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that he never agreed with the "2 year clause" in question when accepting the position of Governor for the Metis Nation from the Plaintiffs.
7. In response to paragraph 15 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, it was the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, which proposed the stated terms of reference. The original terms of reference as stated, however, were not agreed to by the defendant.
8. In further response to paragraph 15 of the statement of claim, and in the alternative, if a contract existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and if it was a term of the contract that the defendant was not eligible to seek or hold political office for a periond of 2 years from the date he ceased to be Governor, which is not admitted but denied, the defendant states that the said clause is void as against public policy.
9. In further response to paragraph 15 of the statement of claim, and in the further alternative, if a contract existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and if it was a term of the contract that the defendant was not eligible to seek or hold political office for a period of 2 years from the date he ceased to be Governor, which is not admitted but denied, and if the entire 2 year clause is not void as against public policy, the defendant states that the portion of the said clause in respect of seeking political office in any of its governing members is void as against public policy.
10. In further response to paragraph 15 of the Statement of Claim, and in the further alternative, if a contract existed between plaintiffs and defendant, and if it was a term of the contract that the defendant was not eligible to seek or hold political office for a period of two years from the date he ceased to be Governor, which is not admitted but denied, and if the entire two year clause is not void as against public policy, and if the portion of the said clause and respective seeking political office in any of its governing members is not void as against public policy, the defendant states that he received no consideration for a material change to his employment contract, or in the alternative, if the defendant did receive consideration, his bargaining position as compared to that of his employer was such that an unequal power relationship existed between the two such that the defendant was not able to bargain freely and was in fact under duress, and the impugned terms of reference were and are unconscionable.
11. In response to paragraph 16 of the statement of claim, the defendant denies that he accepted the position of Governor on January 22, 2002. As the facts are, the defendant accepted from the Metis National Council as appointment as Governor of the Metis Nation on or about March, 1999 and began to receive remuneration therefore in or about January, 2000.
12. In further response to paragraph 16 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, any contract or agreement with the Plaintiffs was completed by January, 2000.
13. In response to paragraph 17 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, as the facts are, the Plaintiffs amended their terms of reference by deleting the 2 year clause and requiring only that the Governor must resign his position prior to announcing his candidacy for any Metis political office. It was the amended terms of reference that the defendant agreed to under his letter dated January 22nd, 2002 with the Metis National Council.
Particulars
The president of plaintiffs at the time of the alleged breach, Geral Morin, agreed on behalf of the Metis National Council to amend the clause respecting the prohibition from seeking political office by deleting the 2 year requirement and only providing that the defendant resign prior to declaring candidacy for such political office. This amended agreement was a consequence of the defendant not agreeing to a swearing-in ceremony in December, 2001 on account of the said clause. After the president of the Metis National Council agreed to amend the clause as aforesaid, the defendant accepted the amended terms of reference.
14. In response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, it was the Metis National Council, an unincorporated non-profit organization, with whom the defendant agreed to resign or be dismissed in the event the defendant chose to run for Metis political office. There was no breach of contract.
15. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim and in the alternative, the defendant states that if the contract was entered into with the plaintiff, and if the terms of contract included a 2 year clause, which is not admitted but denied, that the plaintiff waived the 2 year clause condition or acquiesced to the defendant seeking political office in the Manitoba Metis Federation Inc.
Particulars
The president of the plaintiff at the time of the alleged breach, Geral Morin, agreed by way of verbal communication to allow the defendant to seek office in the Manitoba Metis Federation Inc.
16. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, neither the plaintiffs not the Metis National Council suffered any damages. The defendant puts the plaintiffs to the strict proof of damages.
17. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, the defendant states that, no damage has been caused to the position of governor of the Metis Nation. The defendant puts the plaintiffs to the strict proof of damages.
18. In further response to paragraph 25 of the statement of claim, and in the alternative, and if damage was caused to the position of governor, which is not admitted but denied, the defendant states that any damages to the said office does not enure to the detriment of the plaintiffs. The defendant puts the plaintiffs to the strict proof of this particular damage.
19. In response to the statement of claim as a whole, the defendant states that the plaintiff nor the Metis National Council are not entitled to any damages.
20. In response to the statement of claim as a whole, the defendant states that he performed all of his duties and obligations as Governor of the Metis Nation and he was not unjustly enriched.
21. In further response to the statement of claim, as a whole, the defendant states that there is no basis in law, even if the 2 year clause was included in a contract, if the clause was not void as against public policy and if the contract was with the plaintiff herein, all of which is not admitted but denied, and if the defendant did breach the contract and if the clause was not waived, upon which an employee can be ordered to repay salary for which he performed his contractual duties.
June, 2005
Yvon Dumont
69 Ashbury Bay
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R2V 2T4
Telephone: 338-9146
TO: POSNER & TRACHTENBERG
Barristers, Solicitors & Notaries Public
710 - 491 Portage Avenue
Winnipeg, Manitoba
R3B 2E4
Fax: 944-8878
posted by Clare L. Pieuk at 5:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home