This post refers to the term "Sharp Practice" in relationship to the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) Rules of Conduct, for paralegals and lawyers, refers to and occurs when the LSUC licensed parties use methods to abuse the process of legal proceedings that are not following the rules of the Law Society, not warranted, not standardized or legal, meant to hide their clients and disrupt or delay ANY legal proceedings or ANY COURT matters they are involved in !!.
Gaming the system (also referred to as gaming the rules, bending the rules, abusing the system, cheating the system, milking the system, playing the system, or working the system) can be defined as using the rules and procedures meant to protect a system in order, instead, to manipulate the system for a desired outcome
Legal abuse refers to abuses associated with both civil and criminal legal action. Abuse can originate from nearly any part of the legal system, including frivolous and vexatious litigants, abuses by law enforcement, incompetent, careless or corrupt attorneys and misconduct from the judiciary itself.
Vexatious litigation is legal action which is brought, regardless of its merits, solely to harass or subdue an adversary. It may take the form of a primary frivolous lawsuit or may be the repetitive, burdensome, and unwarranted filing of meritless motions in a matter which is otherwise a meritorious cause of action. Filing vexatious litigation is considered an abuse of the judicial process and may result in sanctions against the offender.
A single action, even a frivolous one, is usually not enough to raise a litigant to the level of being declared vexatious. Rather, a pattern of frivolous legal actions is typically required to rise to the level of vexatious. Repeated and severe instances by a single lawyer or firm can result in eventual disbarment.
SHARP PRACTICE is frowned upon by the Law Society of Upper Canada Rules of Conduct.Many Paralegals and Lawyers use Sharp Practice in their legal firms participation in the legal system further causing back logs of legal proceedings needlessly in defense of their firm or their clients.
Examples of Sharp Practice, is not showing, or notifying parties, using acting agents, locksmiths and other parties related to their cause, that have NO PHYSICAL BUSINESS ADDRESS anywhere, to deliver Court Summonses when they are, or clients are involved in legal proceedings.
Remember SHARP Practice = do whatever it takes, does not matter if they present at, or commit a criminal act, the LSUC rules, the Criminal Code, PIPEDA, Chart Rights, Human Rights or the Rules and procedures in any court proceeding you or your client are involved in.
Should you breach other peoples INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS if your a well known LANDLORD ONLY RIGHTS ACTIVISTÂ ?
Rights are for everybody…not just landlords !
How do you justify defending the rights of anyone… when you violate the rights of others ??
Eviction Specialist, C A Stewart of Landlord legal inc refused to accept her alleged boyfriends Paul t Smith summons issued June 2013, delivered to her legal office at 117 Bayfield Street, when Smith acted as an agent on Landlord legal inc behalf and her law firm was directly involved in the LTB Tribunal, and HR matters the tenant had filed.
Eviction Specialist, C A Stewart of Landlord legal inc, uses agents or sub contractors companies like Paul Richardson's Central Lock & Key, that has NO BRICK & MORTAR STORE, to enter tenants units, change locks and other duties she needs done. Central Lock & Key were hard to get a summons served to, as they are MOBILE UNIT ONLY and Mr Richardson son, Cody Richardson threatened the tenant. and tried to hit his vehicle with the Central lock & Key company van while attempting to serve them summonses for Superior Court Civil matters.
Paul Richardson saves a phone recording for 2 years from attempts to get him served for LTB matters in 2013, and lies about the date of the recording, and plays it on the witness stand to allegedly deceive the court, and help C A Stewart's Dykstra clients in court.
Using "acting agents" or "sub contractors" that are next to impossible to summons, or that paralegals can block access to, is a very common practice done among paralegals and lawyers who practice SHARP PRACTICE frowned by the LSUC.
Landlord Legal signs and enters testimony and allegations from Rob Scruton that have not been heard in any court, not even once into Dykstra civil matters.
Landlord Legal enters and serves documents, evidence and her signed statement of Scrutons testimony breaking rules of procedures and rules of a fair proceeding.
Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal, and her clients Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra of Dykstra Bros Electric, DO NOT SHOW AGAIN for the motions to dismiss the evidence and testimony Stewart entered against the rules of procedures for civil hearing SCC#1852-13.
Landlord Legal places Rob Scruton on her witness list, though she serves against the rules by not giving "proper notice" or the required "will says" to interview the surprise witness from Innisfil, Ontario, Canada. Stewart does this surprise tactic less than 2 weeks before a hearing date. All evidence and will says were court ordered to be delivered to all parties prior to the Landlord Legal inc tactic used.
Catherine Stewart should have known or aught to have known the rules of procedures for small claims court.
Catherine Stewart of landlord legal should have known or aught to have known it was wrong to sign affidavits for her witness, Rob Scruton, when Stewart is directly involved in the Civil proceedings and Human Rights allegations against her firm. False testimony and conflict of interest concerns and allegations just to influence a proceeding Landlord legal and her Dykstra clients are directly involved in.
Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal should have known or aught to have known the testimony she signed for Rob Scruton had never seen one day in court, but enters his testimony she signed anyways to a legal proceeding she was involved in directly.
Paul T Smith, retired OPP officer of 30 years is another witness NOT ON THE WITNESS LIST EITHER, Catherine Stewart of landlord legal inc has not provided proper notice or the will says, for her alleged boyfriend. Paul T Smith ends up on the stand in civil court Dec 2015, for C A Sewarts Dykstra clients, although he is connected to breaching Human Rights while acting as an agent for Landlord legal and Dykstra Bros Electric,Â and had absolutely no knowledge of the allegations in her Dykstra clients proceedings.
Landlord Legal should have known it was wrong to keep using alleged boyfriend Paul Smith, to serve the documents against the rules of procedures, when her alleged boyfriend and Stewart have pending Human rights allegations against them since May 2014.
After not showing for the motions to dismiss the evidence, Stewart has the motions heard the same day and in front of the same Judge hearing the Dykstra hearing.
Stewart also files another motion to split ( after motioning to join ) her personal SCC#1851-13 civil matter filed the same day as Dykstras claim, which Stewart wasÂ told by the Judge in March 2014, was filed in the wrong court to deal with her demands to have this website shut down.Filed Oct 2013 and still in the wrong court in February 0f 2016…can you say harassment and vexatious
Landlord Legal motions to bring her personal civil matter to be heard with her clients in 2014, HR applicant demanding rights to a speedy trial hearing
Paralegals and Lawyers have an obligation to Minimize costs during ALL legal proceedings against ANY party.
Paralegals and Lawyers have the obligation to HONOR UNDERTAKINGS they have agreed to and have signed on behalf of their clients.
Paralegals and Lawyers have the obligation to protect confidential and privileged information and documents they have obtained.
Paralegals and lawyers have the obligation to follow ALL THE RULES OF CONDUCT of the Law Society of Upper Canada.
Paralegals and Lawyers have the obligation to follow THE RULES OF PROCEDURES in all legal proceedings.
Licensed Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to have known all the Rules and Regulations of the ;
- Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (HRTO)
- Criminal Code of Canada
- Controlled Drugs and Substances Act (CDSA)
- Personal Information and Electronic Document Act (PIPEDA)
- Residential Tenancies Act 2006 (RTA)
- Rules of Procedure in ALL COURTS representing any party
- Rules of Conduct (LSUC)
- Should be Knowledgeable in the area they practice
Paralegals and Lawyers should not or should know NOT TO THREATEN or harass parties they are involved in proceedings against with CRIMINAL ARREST, FURTHER LEGAL THREATS, NO TRESPASS OR NO CONTACT LETTERS or any kind of threat meant to harm the other party or to delay, coerce or influence the proceedings they are involved in.
Landlord Legal inc owner has openly threatened an ex tenant with criminal charges on her Landlord legal website while Human Rights/Civil allegations pending ( http://landlordlegal.ca DEC 2015 to Jan 22nd 2016) of her paralegal firm, alleged boyfriend and Dykstra Bros electric owners allegedly have been defending alleged discrimination against the Human Rights of the tenant.
Images showing the serious threats to the ex tenant, Tenant Rights Applicant and the Human Rights Applicant made from the owner, Catherine April Stewart,for Landlord Legal inc publicly advertised paralegal services website threatening CRIMINAL CHARGES after numerous unsubstantiated and FALSE ALLEGATIONS made to the Barrie Police.
Read the posts surrounding the Barrie police confrontations and the paralegals attempts to have the Human Rights Applicant charged with anything !!:Â http://yourpalal.ca/do-barrie-police-continue-to-harass-ex-tenant-for-barrie-paralegal-catherine-stewart/
Barrie police refuse to charge the paralegal numerous times with the numerous unsubstantiated and false allegations she makes, of the ongoing harassment, allegations of false documents submitted for legal proceedings or for Applicant to press criminal harassment charges for the break in and illegal lock change witnessed by attending police officers and instructing paralegal that she had NO RIGHT or LEGAL DOCUMENT required to enter 40 Ellen Street, Barrie Ont on August 15th 2013. when Catherine Stewart and the Dykstras' were present and proceeded to order the locksmith to cut security chain and enter unit illegally.
Catherine Stewart, owner of Landlord Legal filed civil matters Oct 2013 against the ex tenant, knowing of the pending HUMAN RIGHTS matters, amended the SCC 1851-13 application after a year to a personal claim, being told the matter was in the wrong court and needed to go to a higher court to deal with the publication of legal proceedings against her and her Dykstra Bros Electric company of Barrie clients.
Catherine Stewart has locksmiths attend to remove locks after 2 Barrie police officers tell Landlord Legal, that it isÂ "not legal" and "no proper documentation" to do so, but DOES ANYWAYSÂ illegally but states on her website the proper way to get to the SHERIFFS' office and get the proper paperwork… We figured it is a case of "do as I say and not as I do , or teach".Â
Catherine A Stewart of Landlord legal also gives lectures that instructs and teaches landlords not to put tenants on the defensive as well, and to "GO LOOK IN THE WINDOWS WHEN TENANT NOT HOME. wow, can anyone say Trespassing,not to mention teachingÂ landlords, real estate persons, agents and other attendees a serious tenant invasion of privacy.
Catherine Stewarts personal SCC1851-13 allegations are still pending, and are public record, as of Feb 2016 and after filing original claim in Oct 2013, to delay the Law Society complaints, and Human Rights allegations against her company, her alleged boyfriend, and Dykstra Bros Electric owners'.
The SCC1851-13 civil matter filed by C A Stewart is still pending, as Stewart has taken NO ACTION after being told it was IN THE WRONG court.
Catherine Stewart also claimed she had hired David Strashin to represent her for the higher court in July 2014 but again has not taken any action to further her claims.
The Applicant has claimed his Charter Rights, Fundamental Freedoms 2(b) and will continue to defend the public forums, open court and HR publicized findings in all proceedings he is involved in with Catherine Stewart, Paul T Smith,Ralph Dykstra,Donald Dykstra and William Dykstra.
The paralegal should have informed her clients the LTB, Civil and Human Rights are public forums and public documents to the proceedings and freedom of information requested are public documents as stated on the bottom of the LTB forms and additional forms filed for proceedings and can be used as such.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know not to create "CONFLICT of INTEREST" and if so, to remove themselves from ALL legal proceedings they are directly involved in.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know they are to advise clients and not act illegally for the clients they represent.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know they are to advise and regulate those clients on how to behave during proceedings with courtesy, civility, integrity and honor and not bring unrelated matters, disrupt proceedings with threats, unsubstantiated claims or any other method used to intimidate or influence a proceeding.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know they are not allowed to be present at or participate in illegal acts like break ins or illegal lock changes.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know it is wrong and against the rules of procedures to block all CONTACT when the legal representative has come on record and has the obligation to receive legal documents required for legal proceedings without justifiable reasons or a properly applied for peace bond, injunction or court order that states the reasons and the remedy.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know NOT TO FILE vexatious legal proceedings meant to delay proceedings and harm applicants financial situation causing further intentional harm.
Paralegals and lawyers should know or aught to know the rules and responsibility governing minimizing losses and the rules for UNDERTAKINGS.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know to "CONTACT" other parties involved if "NOT ATTENDING" within a reasonable amount of time, to not further costs from "witness fees", waste the "courts time" and wasteÂ "applicants time"
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know the rules and, to be civil, courteous and respectful to everyone, and to respect ALL RIGHTS given to the Applicants or Respondents in any legal proceeding.
Paralegals and Lawyers should have known or aught to have known to act with Civility,Integrity and Honesty at all times when dealing with another party or their representatives.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to have known it was wrong and illegal to enter or misrepresent documents or information into legal proceedings when the document does NOT EXIST in any stated court files.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to have known to keep confidential documents, court evidence and other privileged legal information secured and away from other tenants they rent to in the same building as their LEGAL OFFICES.
Paralegals and Lawyers should know or aught to know to CONTACT legal proceedings and ALL PARTIES, they have come ON RECORD for the proceedings with phone,fax, and contact information and to NOTIFY ALL PROCEEDINGS of ANY CHANGES to office closures and changes to the information they had provided to the courts and the opposing parties.
Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal has the corridor between the 2 buildings shared with an account company firm, who has received many confidential legal documents unsecured several times on behalf of Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal inc, from hand deliveries and process severs.
Paralegals and Lawyers who switch offices, and block communication from parties involved in legal proceedings are in fact breaking the rules of procedures, hiding their clients and preventing the ease of communication meant to make legal proceedings transparent, easier and straight forward is one form of knownÂ "HARD PRACTICE".
There are a lot of paralegals that do "SHARP PRACTICE" to make sure their clients have an edge over the Applicants to further financial stress, hinder, delay and frustrate the involved parties and interfere with the legal processes.
Read the stories surrounding Catherine Stewart of Landlord Legal and her clients, Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra, Donald Dykstra, owners of Dykstra Bros Electric of Barrie as well as the allegations against Landlord legal and Catherine Stewart, use your judgement and see if you feel that Landlord legal inc uses the frowned upon Hard Practices in her legal firm.
Let Your Pal Al know of ANY paralegal or Lawyer that you have been involved with uses methods listed here on our website to gain advantages over the other party they are involved with in legal proceedings.
The Human Rights allegations against Ralph Dykstra, William Dykstra and Donald Dykstra of Dykstra Bros Electric company of Barrie, Ontario started in 2013 and proceedings continue at the HRTO as of January 20th 2016 when David Strashin, apparently came on record but has not notified the HRTO or involved parties of this fact and according to the HRTO Rules of Procedures during proceedings.
The Human Rights allegations against Paul Smith, Catherine Stewart and Landlord LegalÂ paralegal firm of Barrie, Ontario started in 2013 and proceedings continue at the HRTO as of January 20th 2016, when David Strashin, apparently came on record to represent the LTB paralegal who has represented, and delayed the Dykstra Bros allegations, for the last 3 years, in HRTO, but has not notified the HRTO or involved parties of this fact according to the HRTO Rules of Procedures.
With the HR Applicant filing many LSUC allegations, complaints, and concerns starting back from May 24th 2013, with many more complaints to file up to February 2016, Landlord legal has not even been investigated once in the last 3 years by the Law Society of Upper Canada, or the Barrie police from the many complaints filed by the applicant while waiting for the pending HR matter to finish.
Stewart had in Oct 2013 blocked the Law Society complaints by filing and stalling vexatious claims to delay the complaints and the human Rights allegations filed against her legal firm, boyfriend and her Dykstra clients.
3 years and STILL working as a paralegal in our legal system, with many pending unanswered allegations, including illegal entry, illegal lock change, abuse of process allegations, Rules of procedures breaches,entering false documents into legal proceedings allegations, harassment allegations, threatening, coercing and the Human Rights allegations against her legal firm, boyfriend and her Dykstra Bros Electric clients, but still in the legal system.
The HR applicant has requested a time extension from the Law Society of Upper Canada, to file the many allegations and concerns regarding Landlord legal inc, Howard Tavroges and new claims against David Strashin of Toronto. Read the posts on the Law Society of Upper Canada refusing to investigate complaints filed June 2013 against Landlord legal inc
The Law Society of Upper Canada complaints filed against Howard Tavroges, and Catherine Stewart of Landlord legal inc of 117 Bayfield Street, Barrie have been delayed when Stewart claims over legal proceedings are ongoing and the LSUC delayed investigating the May 2013 claims brought forth by the ex tenant over privacy invasion and illegal break in and illegal lock change after a mediated settlement July 18 2013 in LTB Tribunal matters.
Additional methods known to be Sharp Practice will be added to the above compilation as time and need to educate warrant it.
Report Sharp practice and additionalÂ methods used here and we can discuss the rise in court proceedings caused by the needless delays of the paralegal or Lawyers involved.
CHARTER OF RIGHTS
Freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
You have the right to think and believe what you want. You have the right to express those thoughts, without being afraid of being punished or silenced. The Supreme Court of Canada has said these freedoms are important for:
participation in social and political decision-making
the free exchange of ideas
Freedom of the press is essential in a democracy. Newspapers and other media are an important way for people to learn about what is going on and express their ideas.
Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.