View Full Version: Dispute Resolution Law

NS Canada Old Forum > Minister of Justice's Forum > Dispute Resolution Law


Title: Dispute Resolution Law
Description: Let's put this issue to rest.


Jack_Tarr - January 28, 2007 07:28 PM (GMT)
I respectfully request that the members of Canada do not post in this thread until such time as our Government and I have had the opportunity to get things going here. I make this request as I do not want my request to Government to get lost as it seems to have in my appeal thread. I very much appreciate everyone's cooperation here.

Based on the Dispute Resolution Law quoted below, I hereby claim I have an unresolvable dispute with my accuser in which I have been harmed with a warning by the Cabinet of Canada.

I have been unable to resolve this dispute as my accuser has not come forward to face me. While many others have become involved in this dispute, I as the harmed person request first satisfaction under the law.

I hereby appoint ParrrrTay as my arbitrator and await my accuser to approve or to appoint their own as provided under the law. I selct ParrrrTay because her great experience as MOJ in this region gives her excellent insight as to our laws.

I now demand the Cabinet release the name of my accuser so that I can as provided by law, serve them with written notice of my choice of arbitrator.



************************************************************************

Dispute Resolution Law

Whereas, the citizen nations of the Region of Canada way sometimes be in conflict with one another;

And Whereas, the conflict may not be able to be settled with out third party intervention;

The Citizen nations of the Region of Canada are entitled to assistance in settling their conflict, the Dispute Resolution Law is hereby passed;

1. Where there is a dispute between any two parties in the region of Canada with respect to their rights under any law in Canada, or any determination of wrongdoing or breach of statute in the region, the parties shall appoint a single arbitrator to arbitrate the matter in dispute and the decision of the said arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties.

2. If the parties are unable to agree upon a single arbitrator within three days of notice to use this Dispute Resolution mechanism to solve a dispute, each of the parties shall appoint an arbitrator and each arbitrator so selected shall jointly elect a third arbitrator and they shall hear the matter in dispute and deliver a decision, which decision shall be binding on the parties.

3. Where the arbitral nominees or each party cannot jointly agree on a third arbitrator within three days, the Minister of Justice shall appoint a third arbitrator upon request of either of the two parties after the three day period has elapsed. Where the Minister of Justice is one of the parties involved in the dispute, the Prime Minister shall appoint the third arbitrator.

4. If one party provides written notice to the other party, naming an arbitrator pursuant to section 2, and the other party fails to nominate its own arbitrator within three days, the first arbitrator named shall be empowered to hear the matter in dispute and deliver a decision which decision shall be final and binding on the parties.

5. The arbitator(s) nominated and selected to hear the matter shall conduct the hearing in the matter that he or they feel is best in their sole discretion, giving due respect to generally accepted principles of arbitral fairness.

********************************************************************

Carbanousa - January 29, 2007 01:03 AM (GMT)
The time stamp shall be the date and time of invocation.

For the record: January 28th 2007, at 07:28 (Jack_Tarr's local time).

Jack_Tarr - January 31, 2007 08:24 PM (GMT)
I was given the name of the person that reported my post and we had a lengthy discussion.

This person categorically denied reported my post but at the same time admitted reporting the picture that followed it. (Sadly, the original picture was viewed before it was replaced).

In any event, it appears that there are 3 possibilities at this point.

1. Another person reported my post.

2. Cabinet issued a warning without a complaint. (Which they stated in my appeal thread that they never do.

3. The person I had the discussion with was untruthful to me.

I'll tell you right now that we can rule out number 3. There is no way in heck that is the case.

It seems like I am prolonging this issue and perhaps I am but my intent is to see to it that this kind of injustice never happens again in Canada.

I will report more when I learn more.

Carbanousa - February 1, 2007 01:34 AM (GMT)
JT, if I can be of any assistance in this matter, please let me know and I will do my utmost to help clarify this issue.

Jack_Tarr - February 1, 2007 05:56 PM (GMT)
Carb, if you can do the IP research you mentioned to me. All I want to know is was there an actual report on my post and if so, who made it. I would like to have that information via PM if agreeable.

Jack_Tarr - February 2, 2007 04:24 PM (GMT)
bump

Carbanousa - February 3, 2007 06:29 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Jack_Tarr @ Feb 1 2007, 05:56 PM)
Carb, if you can do the IP research you mentioned to me. All I want to know is was there an actual report on my post and if so, who made it. I would like to have that information via PM if agreeable.

Sure thing :).

Carbanousa - February 3, 2007 06:36 PM (GMT)
A request has been put forward to the forum's hosts, InvisionFree.

Jack_Tarr - February 3, 2007 09:58 PM (GMT)
Excellent. I thank you.

Jack_Tarr - February 15, 2007 08:00 PM (GMT)
The time has finally come to put this issue to rest once and for all.

I have had the opportunity to discuss this situation with the person that supposedly reported MY post. This person admits reporting the picture Dimitricus posted and I quote: "I'm also sorry Dimitricus received a warning. I think I was very naive in reporting the post, I just thought that 4_20 would remove the pic & that would be the end of it. As I said, I made my report very light-hearted."

This same person is the one that I was told reported my post. This person categorically denies having reported my post! There is no evidence whatsoever to indicate anyone else reported my post either.

I will now quote and comment on part of 420's post in my appeal thread.

QUOTE
If no one complains, Cabinet just assumes that everyone is okay with it. Once someone is not okay with it, we issue punishment accordingly.


The fact of the matter is, someone complained.

The facts dispute this statement. There person that supposedly reported me denied it emphatically. I know this person very well and they have no reason to lie about this. Somebody screwed up and didn't get their facts straight.

Questionable matter was deemed offensive. Cabinet DID ITS JOB.

Yes they did. The question is, how well did they do it?

I hold no grudge against any of the remaining cabinet members here. I just hope that w3hen and if another occasion comes along, that they spend a little more time examining the facts before they take action.

I now consider this matter closed and request a moderator lock this thread.

Carbanousa - February 16, 2007 12:47 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Jack_Tarr @ Feb 15 2007, 08:00 PM)
I now consider this matter closed and request a moderator lock this thread.

Done.




Hosted for free by InvisionFree