Predictions

Was looking on federal court of appeals website and those three took 30 days for there last judgement, there decision will be posted there for all to see whatever it is

Can you give me a link please?

doingdishes said:

anyone know what:
"Acknowledgment of Receipt received from all parties with respect to Order of the Court and Reasons of the Court both dated November 24, 2014 placed on file on 27-NOV-2014" means?
that's the latest regarding the case. not sure what they mean by Reasons of the Court

Click to expand...

That sounds like they made there decision from what I can gather from doing some prelimanry research, probably release there judgement monday fuckers

Link on judgements

http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/supreme_court/about_judgments.aspx

maddtrapper said:

http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/portal/page/portal/fca-caf_eng

Click to expand...

Thank you

doingdishes said:

anyone know what:
"Acknowledgment of Receipt received from all parties with respect to Order of the Court and Reasons of the Court both dated November 24, 2014 placed on file on 27-NOV-2014" means?
that's the latest regarding the case. not sure what they mean by Reasons of the Court

Click to expand...

Perhaps they made an order regarding some type of issue during the hearing, and due to the lack of coverage or updates from those in the know, we are not aware of what the issue may have been. I think that if the decision was made one way or the other, one of the two opposing parties would be beating their chest either online or elsewhere. We would know.

My prediction....judgement reserved until court case in Feb 2015.

leaffan said:

My prediction....judgement reserved until court case in Feb 2015.

Click to expand...

my feeling as well.....

hope so.

This was just posted n the MMAR Lobby Group I hope it's ok to copy and paste it here.
Acknowledgment of Receipt received from all parties with respect to Order of the Court and Reasons of the Court both dated November 24, 2014 placed on file on 27-NOV-2014352014-11-24VancouverReasons for Order of the Court/ The Honourable Mr. Justice Nadon The Honourable Mr. Justice Webb The Honourable Mr. Justice Boivin Reasons delivered from the Bench by The Honourable Mr. Justice Nadon at Vancouver on 24-NOV-2014 The Court's decision is with regard to the motion / document number 17 Filed on 24-NOV-2014 Copies sent to parties342014-11-24VancouverOrder dated 24-NOV-2014 rendered by The Honourable Mr. Justice Nadon The Honourable Mr. Justice Webb The Honourable Mr. Justice Boivin Matter considered with personal appearance The Court's decision is with regard to the motion / document number 17 Result: dismissed with costs in the cause Filed on 24-NOV-2014 copies sent to parties entered in J. & O. Book, volume 287 page(s) 156 - 156-2014-11-24VancouverThis matter comes on for hearing on 24-NOV-2014 at Vancouver before The Honourable Mr. Justice Nadon The Honourable Mr. Justice Webb The Honourable Mr. Justice Boivin Appearances: BJ Wray/Melissa Nicolls, Department of Justice, Vancouver, BC 604.666.2061 for the appellant John Conroy QC/Kirk Tousaw, Conroy & Company, Abbotsford, BC 604.852.5110 for the respondents Language of Hearing: E Court Usher: Ms Heather Richards Duration: on 24-NOV-2014 from 09:34 to 04:10 Courtroom : Courtroom No. 601 - Vancouver Court Registrar Christian Presber Total duration: 6h36min Before the Court: appeal Result: reserved Before the Court: motion for adducing new evidence on behalf of the respondents Result: dismissed with costs in the cause Reasons delivered from the Bench Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 214 page(s) 16 - 20 Abstract of Hearing placed on file

Any jr lawyers here that can put the lawyer speak into laymen's terms? What exactly was dismissed by the judges?

I think it was new evidence.

It is my understanding that the affifadit was denied as evidence with respect to the 150 gram carry limit.

From Kirk Tousaw posted in the MMAR Lobby Group fb
The decision rendered on the 24th was on the Respondents' (our) motion to adduce new evidence on the appeal. It was denied. We had attempted to have the Court of Appeal accept new evidence related to (a) problems of people who fell through the cracks of Judge Manson's injunction Order; and (b) evidence of the current status of the MMPR and the LPs - who are/are not accepting new clients and what the current pricing is. The decision was rendered from the bench.

but we still get to keep our MMAR licenses?

From what I can interpreted is that the appeal to increase carry limits and allow address changes was denied because no new evidence was provided.

Itsme.

Oh that's really too bad so the mMar Dgs will have a bit of difficulty moving heir elbows around town...

Pounds can move just not your address.

Itsme

The final decision is still to,come apparently on the moving of our gardens and the rest will be dealt with in February at trial.

Yes our MMAR. Licences are still valid.

My opinion only as always