Why did Fasken Martineau lawyer Gerald Ranking not submit costs to the Supreme Court of Canada?
More evidence that Toronto lawyer Gerald ‘Gerry’ Ranking committed fraud upon the Supreme Court of Canada & Ontario courts
Money laundering question: Where did the million dollars go?
Faskens lawyer Gerald L Ranking
On September 4, 2014, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed my application for leave to appeal a judgment of the Court of Appeal for Ontario. I am informed that this doesn’t mean that the SCC thought that my appeal would not succeed or that it was without merit; it simply means that the SCC selects a very few cases out of hundreds of applicants. Apparently the SCC attempts to highlight cases that it believes have national implications, and for its own reasons the court did not choose to consider my case.
That’s life. As an aside, it also means that in some twenty appearances before the courts, no court, up to and including the Supreme Court of Canada, ever listened to or chose to listen to, the voice recordings that prove big law firm lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver fabricated evidence and lied to the Superior Court of Ontario to convict me in absentia of Contempt of Civil Court, and to put me in jail.
Again, that’s life. It is my hope that someday a jury of my fellow Canadians will listen to the voice recordings during the Best vs. Ranking civil case.
I can assure my readers that unlike the legal profession, ordinary Canadians have no reluctance at all to listen to the November 17, 2009 voice recordings of my telephone call with lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Sliver, and to compare those recordings with the false evidence the lawyers provided to the courts to convict and jail me.
(Readers can listen to the recording and examine documents here.)
Why did Gerald Ranking / Fasken Martineau not submit costs?
The rules and case law of civil procedure in Ontario are fairly simple; under normal circumstances it is usual that those litigants who bring actions or motions that are denied by the court might have some liability to pay the opposition for their legal costs.
Thus, when the Supreme Court of Canada declined to consider my appeal, the court awarded $20,364.79 costs payable by me to defendant Kingsland Estates Limited.
But the court awarded no costs payable to Gerald Ranking’s purported client ‘PricewaterhouseCoopers East Caribbean Firm’.
As the Supreme Court of Canada said in its reasons: “The respondent, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, has not submitted a bill of costs..” (SCC Costs decision here PDF 949kb)
A fraud upon the courts explained
Toronto lawyer Gerald L Ranking
Why would Gerald Ranking and Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP law firm not submit a costs claim to the Surpreme Court of Canada as is normal? Why would Faskens and Ranking not attempt to recover costs for their purported ‘client’?
The answer is simple enough: Faskens senior lawyer Gerald Lancaster Ranking and his partners at Fasken Martineau DuMoulin LLP knew that their purported client, ‘PricewaterhouseCoopers East Caribbean Firm’ does not, and did not, exist at any time. Ranking and his law firm did not want to double-down on their fraud upon the Supreme Court of Canada and have the SCC issue another cost order to what the lawyers know is a false, phoney, criminally fraudulent, non-existent ‘client’. Read more