法裔是这样, 见不得别人过的比他/她好。 那些叫嚣给海外买家加税, 给加拿大有房户加税的人, 也不比酸葡萄的法裔强多少,恨不得大家都被政府削得跟他们一样穷困潦倒, 才有幸福感平等感。 |
本帖最后由 justiceQC 于 2017-5-4 15:01 编辑 加拿大的公共机构为什么会面临史无前例的信任危机(https://www.thestar.com/opinion/ ... rust-editorial.html)? 看看加拿大著名学府在十几年前某项专业领域为零时是如何三顾茅庐请一位华裔专家从英国出山来加拿大;十几年后,等这位华裔专家以奠基人身份、把一个专业中心从零打造到成为国际一流之后,这个国际著名学府加魁省公共机构反悔了,一句“elle nie” 否认了十几年来的事实,不但把这位奠基人、缔造者踢出局,还联手所有的相关机构,让一位IVF国际知名专家在魁北克拿不到IVF执照,逼其破产的意图路人皆知: 文革式迫害、资本主义的无情,魁北克,你都占了! 虽然这个学府加魁省公共机构在诉讼案里“nie”(否认)Dr. Seang Lin Tan是这个中心的奠基者,但他们自己的网站都没有否认这个事实,马上上图: 这个知名学府加公共机构用“改头换脸”的方式抵赖事实,连Google都不配合: 主页中承认创建事实,却不提创始人的姓名: 然而,还是在自己的网站专家介绍里,不得不承认Dr.Tan的创始人事实: 可是在诉讼书里,还是抵赖: |
justiceQC 发表于 2017-4-25 06:57 这就是加拿大信用危机的鲜活案例! https://www.thestar.com/opinion/ ... rust-editorial.html |
本帖最后由 justiceQC 于 2017-10-15 08:55 编辑 揭黑继续中,敬请留意! 律政混混,IForYou, Critical Thinker and Voice for the Oppressed in Quebec, Canada! |
Régie du logement 的revocation(撤销前判)庭讯法官在事实就是法条(Art. 89 of the Act respecting the Régie du logement )的经典范例的情况下居然还说“你这是上诉(appeal)内容,不是revocation的事情,你可以上诉。” ,然后他不止一次信誓旦旦地承诺当事人可以上诉,虽然他说的其实和Art. 91相反。但上诉的依据是:有事实错误、法理错误、以及公平原则的重大失误,所以理论上这是可以上诉的。然而,Court of Quebec法庭的法官居然没有穿法袍出庭(联想他的离奇判决,这背后没有隐情吗?!),他说Régie du logement 的revocation(撤销前判)庭讯法官犯了错,但却不给当事人上诉机会,形同彻底剥夺上诉人的基本应诉权利,不给当事人任何陈述案情的机会,直接把预先已经得出的结论口述,这是发生在魁北克法院的荒谬而真实一幕! |
法官上庭为什么要穿法袍? "The robe is considered a reminder of the law and a symbol of neutrality." (https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=145211) 法袍是法律警醒,公正无私的象征。 然而,Court of Quebec魁省法庭竟然出现了法官不穿法袍出庭的异象。接下来异象更是接踵而来: 法官询问当事人需要多长时间陈述案情,当事人回答后他说:好,会排在稍后,因为用时比较长。然而,当庭讯正式开始时,这位不着法袍的法官儿戏般地说:“我看过你的动议了,我要否决你的动议,我给你解释”,没有给当事人任何陈述的时间,直接口授裁决...... 这样看来,他不穿法袍就意味深长了...... “If he were a Muslim, things would have been different” -Appeal in Public for the Systematically Bullying and Lying Legal System in Quebec 1. For any Rent Fixation case, the Régie du logement (Rental board) of Quebec systematically allows landlords to produce evidences during and only during the hearing and then withdraw them immediately after the hearing, deprived in fact tenants of their fundamental rights of contesting and defending; 2. For any Rent Fixation case, the commissioner(judge)s of the Régie du logement care only if landlords provide “good-looking” evidences and they will merely do a calculation without questioning if the evidences are genuine, refuse to give a chance to the tenants to prove bad faith of the landlords, including repeatedly lying under oath**; 3. Although Art. 89 of the Act respecting the Régie du logement says “Where a decision has been rendered against a party who was prevented from producing or supplying evidence by surprise, by fraud or by any other reason considered sufficient, that party may apply for the revocation of the decision”, the Revocation Commissioner said “it was not about revocation, what you asked is an appeal and you can appeal”; 4. The Revocation Commissioner refused the revocation request and the tenants found that what the Commissioner promised was against Art. 91 of the Act that denies the possibility of appeal in such case; 5. In light of the criteria for appealing a decision of the Régie :” a serious, new, controversial or general interest issue; the contested decision presents an apparent weakness, a manifest or gross error in the assessment of the facts; a material error in the administration of the evidence; denial of justice for non-observance of the rules of natural justice.” - Birkhof c. Tandel, 2010 QCCQ 596, the Tenant filed an application for leave to appeal in Court of Quebec; 6. During the Court Presentation, the judge (not in judge’s robe) asked the tenants how long they need to present their case and the tenants said an hour because it might be the last and only chance for them to be heard. The judge said ok and asked them to wait. When the hearing began, without letting the tenants say anything, the judge said your application is being rejected and I will tell you why. He said the commissioner (judge) of first instance made a mistake but he refused to grant an appeal for it. Anything else he said has nothing new to the tenants. The judge then dictated his pre-rendered decision and asked the tenants to leave; 7. The tenants did whatever Robert Chu* did: wrote letters to the Prime Minister, the Justice of Quebec, politicians who acted without any credit, promised to reply and no reply, promised to do things and then silenced; 8. The important thing is that the tenants are Chinese in Quebec, Canada. Many Chinese people liked the most hot comment given to Robert Chu’s death: “if he were a Muslim, things would have been different.” * : https://www.thestar.com/news/can ... l-school-grads.html ** Keywords : Grégor Des Rosiers, a commissioner in the Régie du logement, Sarah Bissonnette, a lawyer in Droit Locatif et Immobilier, Gestion Immobilière Inc. *** : http://bbs.51.ca/thread-838976-1-1.html |
“民主”这顶高帽在魁北克的某些权威机构已经漏洞百出,形同渔网。Regie du logement, 魁省的租房委员会,对于任何租金涨幅的案例居然纵容房东当庭提交所谓“证据”并当庭撤回,只给房客几分钟甚至没有质疑时间,以致于房东伪造证据已经到了肆无忌惮的地步,反正只是骗骗只管按公式计算的所谓“法官”,剥夺处于社会劣势房客的起码司法权益:有合理时间质疑证据。 “民主”这顶高帽,在魁北克已经是魁北克人的至高权益、以及对穆斯林难民的政治正确权益的代名词,其他少数族裔,因为你是守法公民,因为你只会怒而不争,更不会向那些因惯用暴力而获得特别权益的族裔靠拢,所以,你就是几百年来、以及未来的几百年必然的社会底层。太多的实例证明,即便一朝是叱咤风云的华人精英,也逃不脱被边缘、被打压、被底层化的命运;更多当下人前风光的白领精英,躲在暗处的苦水可曾向谁倾诉? 越来越多的穆斯林难民房客,早晚会知道光鲜的魁北克“民主”,原来不过是张破渔网,钱权交易、政治资本积累的工具,今朝的幸运儿,保不齐是明朝的牺牲品。 魁北克的司法系统究竟是否也是魁北克“民主”渔网上的一个洞,近期有案情揭晓...... |
justiceQC 发表于 2017-6-9 20:57 在主流法语新闻中的Dr.Tan: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKm-H6cqOzA 虎门无犬子,他的儿子在TED的演讲: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rsyr8oS_xs |
Tomm007 发表于 2017-6-9 21:51 警察为了保护证据,要求他不许碰监控录像设备,店家只有遵守的份,如同让你举手投降,你只能照办,后面的是事就是警察失职,延误取证的问题了。从店家的角度来看,没有证据至少好过有对他不利的证据,所以将计就计才是王道。 |
这个报警的华裔店主,知道监控里面有证据,也应该知道监控会到时覆盖,为什么不备份呢? |
注:虽然魁北克当局制裁性地不给其私人诊所发IVF执照,但这并不影响陈医生个人的IVF执业。魁北克这样把一位在IVF业内执牛耳的国际一流专家打入冷宫,但华人自己怎能让这样的专家人才流失其黄金价值? 酒香不怕巷子深,请华人朋友一起来扶植被不公正打压的医学专家! 他在创造多项世界及加拿大记录后被CBC, CTV采访的视频: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F8lSuuQGHwI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8tKroIebyI |
一石激起千层浪?UP! |
本帖最后由 justiceQC 于 2017-4-25 10:34 编辑 说来你也许不相信,加拿大魁省的蒙特利尔,这个高晓松口中“过气衰败”的城市,居然卧藏着国际一流的顶尖学术人才,而且还是华夏传人。顶尖一流到什么程度? 就连和他打官司的机构网页上,也不得不承认他是“ an internationally recognized infertility expert and a pioneer in the simplification of in-vitro fertilization.”(国际公认的专家,专业先驱),“has brought generational change to the challenges of human infertility”(为人类某领域的挑战带来划时代的变化),承认他 “In 1996, he founded the McGill Reproductive Centre”(在1996年,成立了McGill生殖中心),承认 “Centre has been at the forefront of research and technological advances”(该中心一直处于研究和技术前沿);承认他的团队所取得专业实践成功率“among the highest in the world” (是世界上最高)。然而,在诉讼官司里,这个承认他个人价值的机构却对上述事实只用了一个词“nie”(法语,意思就是否认)。 当你走投无路、绝地反击、拿起法律武器选择维权时会怎样呢? 文革式的知识分子遭遇,就在加拿大这个美其名曰的“民主”国家上演了: -尽管当年该权力机构重金求贤,打败另一家学术机构,把他请到魁北克来,又用高利润(当然也是高风险,从零打造)许诺,让他付出十几年的心力,从零打造一个学术中心,并使之成为世界一流;尽管合作主管再三承诺他在这个中心的领航地位不变;尽管合作主管都承认法律法规都一时难以拔除他的职位,最后该权力机构只用一封群发的邮件就宣布免除职务,让他当众蒙羞、被扫地出门! -尽管这个中心的合作基础(协议)都是用十几年的合作事实写成,尽管魁北克民法尊重“约定俗成”的合约存在形式,权力机构变脸时,只要一个词就好:“deny”(否认)! -尽管他还是IVF这个领域公认权威,世界级专家,魁北克当局还是拒绝给他的诊所发IVF执照,让他在夹缝中生存。逼他破产的意图,路人皆知。 这就是魁北克,承诺你最好的条件,只因为你身上有需要获取的价值,一旦价值被悉数获取,你就是被丢在烂泥潭里挣扎的羔羊! 文革式的知识分子迫害、资本主义的冷血无情,魁北克,你都占了! 相关链接: http://mcgillivf.com/committee-b ... 5&teamType=101&bg=2 https://www.mcgill.ca/obgyn/sean ... sc-facog-mmedog-mba |
Dr.Dao被美联航暴虐霸凌,加拿大的华人医生有会有什么样的遭遇? 敬请关注。 |
您将要访问以下网页
请注意:您将要访问的站点不是 51.CA 官方网站。为了保护您的财产和信息安全,请不要在该网页输入您的QQ密码、Facebook、微信密码等信息。
如果您不了解该网站的详细情况,请谨慎访问该页面。