COVID-19
Saskatchewan protestors ask Supreme Court to hear their challenge to gathering restrictions
News release from the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that Jasmin Grandel and Darrell Mills intend to take their constitutional challenge to Saskatchewan’s Covid gathering restrictions to the Supreme Court of Canada. On May 15, 2024, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed their case. Today, our lawyers applied for leave to appeal their case to Canada’s highest court in a potentially precedent-setting case about the freedom of peaceful assembly.
On December 19, 2020, Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills participated in a peaceful protest against the Government of Saskatchewan’s Covid lockdown measures at the Vimy Memorial in Saskatoon’s Kiwanis Park. Police ticketed them for attending a protest exceeding Saskatchewan’s 10-person outdoor gathering limit.
Jasmin Grandel, a young mother, attended peaceful protests to express her concerns about the lack of transparency surrounding government restrictions. She was especially concerned about the requirement that her son wear a mask in kindergarten.
Darrell Mills, certified in Mask Fit Testing and trained in supplied air breathing systems, also attended peaceful demonstrations to voice his concerns about improper mask usage and the significant burdens mask mandates placed on persons with physical or psychological conditions.
On April 7, 2021, our lawyers filed a constitutional challenge to these gathering restrictions at the Saskatoon Court of Queen’s Bench on behalf of Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills. They argued that the gathering restrictions violated their freedoms of expression, peaceful assembly, and association – protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. That challenge was heard by the Court on June 29, 2022.
Unfortunately, while it was conceded that the gathering restrictions did limit their freedom of expression, the Court ruled that the limitation was justified. Further, the Court found that, because the limitation on freedom of expression was justified, the limitations on the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association were also justified without the need for independent analysis of those rights.
Ms. Grandel and Mr. Mills were not deterred, appealing that decision on August 14, 2023. In yet another setback, however, their appeal was dismissed on May 15, 2024, by the Court of Appeal for Saskatchewan in a unanimous decision upholding the lower Court’s findings.
They are now asking the Supreme Court of Canada to hear their case. On August 14, 2024, our lawyers filed a Notice of Application for Leave to Appeal to the Supreme Court. If granted, they will argue that Saskatchewan’s Covid gathering restrictions were primarily an unjustifiable limitation of the freedom of peaceful assembly, which was not centrally considered. The Supreme Court has an opportunity to develop a more robust legal framework for addressing limitations to that freedom.
Our lawyers argue that, in many cases where the government has violated multiple Charter freedoms, particularly the freedoms of expression, assembly and association, courts tend to focus on limitations to freedom of expression only. In other words, courts tend to find an independent analysis of violations of other rights unnecessary. If a court finds that the government justifiably limited freedom of expression, they tend to find that the government justifiably limited the freedom of peaceful assembly if it were to have been infringed.
Canadian courts ought to develop a test for addressing violations to the freedom of peaceful assembly. Today, two Saskatchewan citizens have asked the Supreme Court to develop such a test and to apply it to gathering restrictions that impacted more than a million residents. If this case is heard by the Supreme Court, it could have a profound impact on the fundamental freedoms of Canadians.
Lawyer Andre Memauri says, “Our request for leave to appeal in this matter seeks to address concerns with how Charter violations are addressed within the section 1 analysis, when numerous Charter violations are engaged. Additionally, there exists a void in jurisprudence with respect to a test in how to address the guarantee of peaceful assembly directly, and we are hoping the Supreme Court of Canada provides guidance on this increasingly important matter to Canadians.”
COVID-19
Ontario healthcare workers file $170 million class action over COVID mandates
From LifeSiteNews
A group of healthcare workers in Ontario who say their rights were infringed after refusing to go along with COVID workplace jab mandates have launched a $170 million class-action lawsuit against the province’s government and chief medical health officer.
The lawsuit was brought forth by the United Health Care Workers of Ontario (UHCWO) and challenges an order made in 2021 by Ontario’s Medical Officer of Health Dr. Kieran Moore that mandated all hospitals in the province implement healthcare worker COVID jab mandates.
“We were witness to vast numbers of dedicated healthcare workers having their livelihoods and careers abruptly taken away, simply for making a personal medical choice,” said the UHCWO in a media statement.
Moore’s mandate, known as Directive 6, went into effect on September 7, 2021. The class action looks to help the unionized healthcare workers impacted by the directive who say their freedoms were violated by the rule.
“Other health-care workers were coerced into a medical treatment with the threat of being terminated, which stripped away the element of informed consent. Others were denied both medical and religious exemptions to this medical treatment,” said the union.
The court proceedings will be taking place in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, which must certify the lawsuit before it can officially proceed. The class-action is open to all unionized Ontario healthcare workers who were impacted by Moore’s directive.
According to the UHCWO, the broadness of the class-action has the potential to include “thousands or tens of thousands of health care workers across Ontario.”
“It includes unionized healthcare workers that were fully vaccinated, partially vaccinated, or unvaccinated. It includes unionized workers that remained employed, were placed on leave, terminated, resigned, or took early retirement due to the issuance of Directive 6,” says the group.
The UHCWO group has retained Sheikh Law to represent the plaintiffs in the suit, as well as any potential class action members.
Overall, the lawsuit is asking for a declaration that the provincial government as well as Moore were “negligent in the distribution, marketing, public recommendation and mandate of the COVID-19 vaccine.”
Draconian COVID mandates, including those surrounding the experimental mRNA vaccines, were imposed by the provincial Progressive Conservative government of Ontario under Premier Doug Ford and the federal Liberal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Many recent rulings have gone in favor of those who chose to not to get the shots and were fired as a result, such as an arbitrator ruling that one of the nation’s leading hospitals in Ontario must compensate 82 healthcare workers terminated after refusing to get the jabs.
The mRNA shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects in children. The jabs also have connections to cell lines derived from aborted babies. As a result, many Catholics and other Christians refused to take them.
Lawsuit argues ‘adverse events’ associated with COVID jabs were ‘either recklessly or willfully ignored’
In total, the damages being sought by the plaintiffs are broken down into four parts, those being $50 million for pain and suffering, $50 million for misfeasance in public office, $20 million for tortious inducement to breach contract, and another $50 million in punitive damages. The suit also looks to have the plaintiffs compensated for legal costs as well as lost income.
The main plaintiff in the lawsuit is Ontario nurse Lisa Wolfs and according to the UHCWO, it is looking to get enough funding before officially initiating the certification process. If this part fails, she will be on the hook for all costs.
Wolfs worked as a clinical nurse educator at London, Ontario health centre, and is contending that the COVID jab mandates made it so that there were unauthorized modifications made to her employment contract. These modifications made it so that she had to reveal her personal medical information.
According to the lawsuit, she was dismissed after 16 years despite having a stellar work record. Wolfs has argued that her termination was a violation of her contract, which did not mandate she have a jab as a condition of work.
“Known and unknown potential risk of adverse events associated with the COVID-19 vaccination were either recklessly or willfully ignored,” reads the lawsuit.
“There was no long-term safety data available to the Chief Medical Officer of Health when enacting and enforcing the Order on mandatory vaccinations and as such the Order created a foreseeable and unreasonable risk of harm to the Plaintiff and Class Members.”
COVID-19
Judge allows B.C. government workers’ lawsuit against COVID mandates to proceed
From LifeSiteNews
‘Our legal campaigns are a critical, precedent-setting fight to ensure the preservation of all workers’ employment and Charter rights in British Columbia and Canada for generations to come,’ celebrated the British Columbia Public Servants Employees for Freedom.
A court has ruled that a class action lawsuit launched against the provincial government of British Columbia on behalf of “all unionized” public servant workers in the province who faced persecution resulting from COVID mandates can proceed.
The court case will be heard in April of 2025, noted the British Columbia Public Servants Employees for Freedom (BCPSEF), a non-profit organization that assists public service workers in the province.
“Since October 2021, BCPS Employees for Freedom (BCPSEF) has led a campaign in defense of medical privacy and bodily autonomy on behalf of all public servants and our fellow British Columbians. This has involved raising awareness about the provincial government’s harmful proof of COVID-19 vaccination policy and undertaking a series of legal actions,” said the group in a press release.
“Our legal campaigns are a critical, precedent-setting fight to ensure the preservation of all workers’ employment and Charter rights in British Columbia and Canada for generations to come.”
The class action was initially brought forth by Plaintiff Jason Baldwin’s, with the BCPSEF explaining that now the “Baldwin class action has been merged together with a separate class action claim by unionized B.C. healthcare workers that is being supported by @UHCWBC.”
“Certification of both claims will be argued at 5 days of hearings scheduled in B.C. Supreme Court in Victoria beginning on April 7, 2025,” said the group.
Both class actions made the arguments that workers who refused the COVID shots and were discriminated against had their rights violated “under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms for imposing new terms and conditions of employment on existing and freely negotiated employment agreements absent collective bargaining, consideration, or consent.”
“The actions also claim breach of employees’ common law and statutory privacy rights, as well as misfeasance in public office by B.C.’s Provincial Health Officer, Dr. Bonnie Henry,” said the group.
The class action was initially filed in October of 2023. According to the BCPS, some 38,000 public servants were directly impacted by the B.C. provincial government’s “coercive and unjustifiable proof of COVID-19 vaccination mandate” which it noted caused “untold suffering and harm.”
Some 314 employees related to public service in the class action were fired for refusing to take the COVID shots, with another 175 placed on leave.
The NDP (New Democratic Party) government of British Columbia, which was just re-elected, had in place a COVID jab mandate for healthcare workers years after most provinces dropped theirs. It was not until July of this year that its chief health officer Bonnie Henry formally announced an end to the COVID jab mandate policy for those working in health care.
Many healthcare workers were fired or placed on leave for refusing to get the COVID shots.
Despite removing the mandates, the provincial government announced that it was creating “a vaccine registry,” forcing all healthcare workers to disclose vaccination status to their employer.
The class action by British Columbian public servants is just the latest in a string of lawsuits against provincial governments for enacting draconian COVID mandates which resulted in thousands of businesses going under as well as many people fired for not getting the shots.
As reported by LifeSiteNews, a recent class-action lawsuit on behalf of dozens of Canadian business owners in Alberta who faced massive losses or permanent closures due to COVID mandates has been given permission to proceed by a judge.
-
Daily Caller23 hours ago
RFK’s Calls To Ban One Of Big Pharma’s Most Powerful Tools Rattle Drugmakers Despite Uncertain Political Prospects
-
Daily Caller2 days ago
‘Explore Every Action Necessary’: Here’s How Trump Admin, GOP May Change Fight Against Mexican Cartels
-
Digital ID18 hours ago
The End of Online Anonymity? Australia’s New Law Pushes Digital ID for Everyone To Ban Kids From Social Media
-
Energy2 days ago
Solar’s Dirty Secret: Expensive and Unfit for the Grid
-
Daily Caller19 hours ago
‘Landman’ Airs A Rare And Stirring Defense Of The U.S. Oil-And-Gas Industry
-
Crime1 day ago
What did Canada Ever Do to Draw Trump Tariff on Immigration, You Ask? Plenty
-
Automotive7 hours ago
Northvolt bankruptcy ominous sign for politicians’ EV gamble
-
Alberta2 days ago
Alberta minister blasts province’s NDP leader for seeming to mock Christians