Canadian judicial council

Canadian judicial council is another Goverment establishment to questions Judges and responding complaints  against judges,Is that true?

No it is not,Canadian Judicial Council is advocating judges for complaints,instead of responding and investigating complaint that they are covering up judges,they are not transparent and Canadian judical council is not credible.

Canadian Judicial council’s last cover up is judge Donald Mckenzie from Brampton  superior court of Justice.

CJC must be replaced with civilian members ,there should be no judges, lawyers or anyone related with the Law society  in there ,Ombudsman should be involved with these complaints along with other civilian members.

Dog doesn’t bite dog simple as it is.They are there to suck those complaints from the public and there is no news from that point by publications on their web page name by name.

Why don’t they publish how many judges have been complaint by name,as long as there is no transparency there is no trust and credibility.You could see some of the judges name to show off on their webpage but,realty is ;there are many others covered up and they don’t put their names ,they just close the files with out proper investigation.

Justice system already in corruption and Canadian Judical Council is involved with this corruptions by protecting judges.

Judge Donald Mckenzie bribed by one of the insurance company to help insurance get away from the trial.At the pre trial instead of giving trial date he gave motion date for combining trials into one.

-The insured’s pre trial has been wasted and insured has to wait for a motion date to get the decision combining trials or not.6 more months or more.

That makes the insured suffer more  and benefits only insurance companies and insurance companies wanted this way ,judge obey the insurance companies decisions like a puppet,they are realy puppet just like a Lederer ,Pollack,Mckenzie or Richardson.

These puppets are relax because they have been backed up by Canadian Judical Council no matter what they do or how much money they get from insurance companies as bribery.

Canadian Judicial council members are Judges and they don’t bite those sold out puppets because Canadian Judicial Council is full of puppets,Dogs don’t bite dogs the truth hurts public  and only ordinary citizens are suffering.

Conservatives are in charge of the government and they don’t do anything about these corruptions that means they get their benefits out of this corruptions.

Question;How many politicians are involved with these insurance fraud against public?How many politicians are getting their second payments from insurance companies?just like those insurance puppets judges some politicians specially from  conservatives are involved with these corruption and they are insurance puppets just like Law Society members.(I don’t even mention about Liberals that they are even the worst ,we know this from Ontario government provincial and previous federal government before the conservative government.)

Good for you,we are all stupid not to see this and not to act,eventually this corruptions will turn against your family members ,your grandchildren if not stopped here.You guys are not going to be incharge in the future but corruptions will be there forever to bite your future,this country’s future and you wouldn’t be alive to use your connections or power to stop hurting your family members or your grandchildren.

Every one of us need Justice one day or another day,never know when will you need Justice for your life and when the time comes it will be too late to act,as a matter affect it is already late because they became bone in the system and it is really difficult to get rid-of. Thx to consevatives for bringing corruptions into our life.

Thanks to Harper for acting and involving corruptions along with these members of corruptions,this corruption became another government estabilisment and second government inside the government (just like happened in Italy  once) ,they are assigning judges or appointing judges and wonder how many minister has been appointed by this mafia.


Do you want to invest in Canada? Justice sytem corrupted federally so,think twice.

Federal judge and Justice system has been corrupted,it effects,every single province of Canada ,federal judges have been assigned by money’s ,insurance companies,or they assign themselves,who ever pays them well.

Here is the reality;all the corruption has begun with conservative Goverment. Corruption is getting bigger  as long as conservatives are in charge.

If you want to trust law ,don’t even bother there is no law in here,just like a thirth world country,money talks and buys.

If federal judges are corrupted think about provincial judges or justice systems.

These are the truths and corruption has been written  in this blog,read carefully, and think twice before you move yourself into a trouble,I assure,you can not find any rights because  law is not exist.

Neither you ,nor your money and your life is under protection by laws,unless otherwise you have a good connection and big amount of money.

We all saw what they did to Rob Ford,because he did not support ( not enough) casinos in the city so they make him media monkey and look at the judge is doing same ,using drugs ,even worst,every one is silent.


If Rob Ford was guilty because of the drug use ,so does judge Lederer.

Canadian judical council is hiding this ,chief of Justice is hiding this.

Justice system is for sale,who ever has enough money to buy,come and invest if you dare!

E-mail from ministry of justice Ministry of justice and my responds

Re: Correspondence on behalf of the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

I am not looking for legal advise from the minister or I am not complaining about the decision of my case ,I already complaint about the conducts of judge to CJC so,I am not complaining you about the conduct of a judge,what I am complaining about are FRAUD,CORRUPTION,BRIBERY,DRUG ADDICT JUDGES,COVERING UP THE MESS by CHIEF OF JUSTICE,they became bone in the system ,are you blind or you don’t really want to see,insurance is assigning judges to the cases,what else are you looking for to act.I keep screaming up what ever the tool I find until
You clean this mess.

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 3, 2015, at 11:06 AM, Ministerial Correspondence Unit – Mailout <> wrote:

Dear Arif:

On behalf of the Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, I acknowledge receipt of your correspondence concerning your complaints about the judges involved in your case.

As Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Minister MacKay is mandated to provide legal advice only to the federal government. I hope you will understand that, for this reason, he is not able to provide legal advice to members of the public or to become involved in a specific case or situation. Moreover, the independence of the judiciary from the influence of elected officials is a fundamental principle of Canadian law, and neither the Minister of Justice nor departmental officials can comment on or intervene in cases that have been decided by the courts.

As you may know, under sections 63‑69 of the Judges Act, the Canadian Judicial Council is empowered to address complaints relating to the conduct of federally appointed judges. It is important to note that the complaints process relates only to the “conduct” of a judge, which does not usually include a judge’s decisions either during or at the end of a case. Further information regarding the complaints process can be found at

Thank you for writing.

Yours sincerely,

L. Bisson
Ministerial Correspondence Unit

Brain injury cases and experts are psychologist (trick is they are not experts nore doctors)insurance companies find the easy and cheapest way to deny claims

Thanks to BRIAN

John Gregory March 4th, 2015 at 10:50 am
The Law Society of Upper Canada also makes its decisions public, with some detail about the offence and often some detail about the penalty. The reasons are reported on CanLII. Suspensions for serious offences often require supervised practice for a period after they end.
Brian Francis March 4th, 2015 at 1:24 pm
Excellent questions – one as a member of “the public at large” I’ve been asking for years – without answer. “Misleading clients and colleagues” covers a lot of ground. So maybe one way to come at this is to present various “challenging” scenarios to law students for discussion as to whether or not this or that (mis?)behaviour fits within the ethical parameters and/professional standards being taught. Keeping in mind “ethics matter” and that professional duties to the court ought not be mere high-sounding rhetoric – here is an example of what the public and perhaps students might see as ethically and professionally problematic. My understanding is that the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure have always promised the public that expert testimony can only be proffered by properly qualified experts and that this was made more explicit in 2010. Further, the LSUC wrote that “lawyers have a professional duty to check and challenge the qualifications of opposing experts and to challenge them whenever it is appropriate to do so”?
So I ask – how is it possible that a psychologist – unqualified to proffer expert opinion evidence in brain injury cases – was able to do so over and over and over for several years without challenge to his qualifications? A simple toll-free call to the College of Psychologist of Ontario – or a quick on-line check of this psychologist’s membership profile – would have revealed that he wasn’t authorized by his health regulatory body to proffer opinions about brain injury. And yet this psychologist did exactly that time and again.
Why did the auto insurer defence lawyers hire this psychologist and mislead the court in this way? Or didn’t they know this psychologist was not authorized to practice in the area of neuropsychology? If not –how could they not – given how simple it would have been to find out? Hundreds of Ontario personal injury cases (997) – many of them brain injury cases – were tainted by this failure. Of course the next obvious question is why didn’t the plaintiff lawyers call the regulatory College (CPO) to confirm that this “opposing expert” was in fact properly qualified to proffer neuropsychological opinion evidence for the defence in brain injury cases? The fact is none did.
There is lots of discourse floating around about the gatekeeping responsibilities of triers of fact and the need to ensure that only properly qualified experts are permitted to proffer opinion evidence. But how can triers of fact hope to discharge their gatekeeping responsibilities if nether the insurer defence lawyers nor plaintiff lawyers are actually checking to ensure the medico-legal experts have the qualification they claim to have?
Trying to get an answer to some of these questions is not an easy task. The FSCO Arbitration Unit takes no responsibility for the fact that one can go to its website – plug in the name of this psychologist – and get long list of hits in which brain injured Applicants were painted by this fake expert as malingerers (all his assessments allege malingering or symptom exaggeration). Not once were his qualifications challenged. FSCO’s position was that it was up to the lawyers on either side to raise this issue (“whenever appropriate to do so”) during the hearing. Fair enough. But FSCO also took the stance that it has no obligation, ethical or otherwise, to inform the many victims (former FSCO Applicants) that their cases were polluted with unchallenged, expertise and might require another look. How would law students reconcile that stance with the aftermath of the Dr. Charles Smith fiasco? |His cases were reviewed. Too be wrongfully incarcerated for years on the basis of testimony proffered by a “woefully inept” “expert/pathologist must have been a living Hell. But what about highly vulnerable, cognitively challenged brain injured accident victims being painted as fakers and tossed to the curb by FSCO Arbitrators based on the unchallenged “expert” opinion evidence of an unqualified psychologist. If wrongful convictions in criminal court can be revisited – then why not wrongful decisions in civil court?
As a result of a complaint to the CPO – brought by one of the subjects (not by any lawyer) of this “expert’s” handiwork this psychologist was referred by his College’s Complaints Committee for a Discipline Hearing on eleven counts of professional misconduct. Like the infamous Dr. Smith – rather than face a Disciplinary Hearing this psychologist chose instead to “voluntarily” retire from the profession and agreed not to seek to practice anywhere in North America – ever again.
So in this scenario (case study for students)) we have a highly dubious “expert” who painted all the vulnerable subjects of his unchallenged “expertise” as fakers and who, in the absence of challenge, was able to “mislead” triers of fact (the court) again and again. But for a toll-free call and subsequent formal complaint to the CPO made by a layperson (not by any of the many lawyers involved on one side or the other) – he would still be proffering unchallenged, unqualified “expert” opinion evidence and making a nice living in the witness box. In the aftermath of this fiasco the CPO disseminated a document to its members clearly spelling out the College’s required qualifications to proffer opinion evidence in brain injury cases. It is unclear if this “Advisory” has had any effect on the quality of psychological expert evidence in Ontario brain injury cases – or if lawyers even use it.
So on the continuum of ethical and professional expectations (aspirational or otherwise) where would law students decide this failure lies. 1) No problem – all is well. 2) A little bit iffy but what the Hell – injured litigants ought not expect a “perfect” system 3) a serious problem that needs fixing.
So far, nothing has been done to improve the state of expert opinion evidence in the Ontario personal injury context. Not surprisingly – scenarios similar to this one have happened in the sane context. The response to date from the legal community has been silence.
If this is ever to change – it will be today’s law students who improve thing for tomorrow’s injured litigants. Till then – all of Ontario’s (over 60,000) injured auto accident victims should have the benefit of warning upon entering the personal injury, expert witness, adjudication/litigation system: “Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.”.

Brian let me tell you why:Lawyers ,insurance and judges and or arbitrators working all together to bring the insured case down then they share the benefits at the end.Profit sharing ,that money belongs to injured insured and they don’t care what happen to him,simple as it is,they don’t want to see,not because they are blind,because that is how they build the system up.
Look and find if you can,is there any poor personal injury lawyer.
Answer is no,they like stealing ,stealing from the injured clients and left them at the end with peanuts or even less,they don’t care if they are in wheel chair or paralyzed,they are using this unprofessional unexperts to get the reports to bring the client down at the end ,game is simple and continuous

FSCO ARBITRATION DECISION FAX to the seni our arbitrator j.macey

FSCO FILE NUMBER;A12-003908 SKO FEB-4-2015

Dear madam i would like to get my arbitration decision if i have a right to do so please.

Your letter states that my lawyer Cemal Acikgoz should contact with you instead of me and unfortunately my lawyer did not show up to the hearing so i fired him at the day of the arbitration about 6 months ago and I was self represented at the arbitration hearing. Your letter shows that you have very little knowladge about my case and you did not even look at or respond my inquiry properly about my requesting the decision.So,

I have to take this as a dissrespect to a citizen who is seeking his right.

Isn’t that enough crushing citizens and putting citizens in a stupid position the way you respond my fax in your letter.

Your letter was rude and did not clarify my question about the dead line.

Unfortunately I have to publish this fax along with your letter and previous fax on the web page to show and make people understand how behave FSCO to citizen who is seeking his right and meaning of FSCO.

In your web page clearly states that 3 months for the decision and it has been 4 months and i am still waiting,this only benefits UNICA insurance company and if i have to apply for THE appeal unfortunately i have to wait for appeal decision as well as this one.

Now with my all respect ˇ(unlike yours to me) I would like to get my decision or dead line for my decision please and please stop wasting my time and respect citizens at least once, instead of billion dollars Insurance companies, I know it is really hard for you guys to show some respect to ordinary citizens but,please try once at least and sorry i dont have billion dollars to earn your respect.

best regards

Ordinary Citizen

Arif Sahinbay

Sent from Windows Mail