List of all proceedings, & the issues
25 proceedings - The courts do not allow Aletkina to access forensic assessment of past / current capacity under Rule 7, and sec. 105 of the CJA - Forensic assessment of mentally ill self-represented litigants is not accessible without court's order and directions -The judges/courts deny judicial/court integrity to Aletkina - The judges/courts' administration contravened Acts of Parliament, committed criminal offences against administration of law and justice - MERGER of three state powers and corporations create FASCIST environment to benefit elite and victimize / execute innocent mentally ill self-represented plaintiff, expert witness of the MERGER’s crimes - Judges - criminals
I. Ontario Labor Relations Board, 1140-03-OH - 2003
(1) Aletkina’s OLRB Application 1140-03-OH, Oct. 22, 2003; Nov. 3, 2003 Sargeant, dismissed, recommended to file to Human Rights Tribunal
II. Ontario Superior Court of Justice, CV-09-212-SR (Kingston), CV-10-407042 (Toronto)
(2) Hospital’s Motion to Transfer action to Toronto (CV-10-407042), on Plaintiff's consent, heard April 14, 2010, Master A. MacLeod-Beliveau - granted
(3) Hospital’s Motion for Timetable, heard Aug. 10, 2011, Aletkina consented, Master McAfee - granted – signified Estoppel, stopped running of Limitation Period stopped until Dec. 31, 2011, making all amendments of claim tenable. [See also Table for Calculating Limitation Period]
(4) Aletkina’s Motion for Appointment of PGT; was withdrawn / discontinued in December 2012
(5) Aletkina’s discovery-related Motion for amending statement of claim and compelling defendant to answer refused questions and to produce requested evidences, heard April 30, 2013 and June 20, 2013. HSC opposed. Master McAfee - dismissed
(6) Status Hearings, heard Aug. 29, 2013, Master Dash III. Divisional Court, File 402/13
III. Divisional Court, File 402/13
(7) Aletkina’s Motions for extension of time for perfecting appeal, HSC opposed, heard Oct. 9, 2013, Justice Himel, granted
(8) Aletkina’s Motions for extension of time for perfecting appeal, HSC opposed, heard Nov. 19, 2013, Justice Matlow, granted
(9) Aletkina’s Motions for adducing fresh evidence on appeal, HSC opposed, heard Jan. 29, 2014, Justice Harvison Young, HSC opposed, dismissed
(10) Aletkina’s Motion for Review of order of Harvison Young, HSC opposed, heard Apr. 14, 2014, Justices Hackland, Matlow, Kiteley – granted
(11) Aletkina’s Appeal of decision of McAfee dated Aug. 12, 2013, with re-hearing of Aletkina’s Motion for Fresh Evidence; HSS opposed, heard July 16, 2014, Justice Corbett – dismissed IV. Court of Appeal for Ontario, File M44446 Appeal / Motion for Leave to Appeal
IV. Court of Appeal for Ontario, File M44446 Appeal / Motion for Leave to Appeal
(12) Docket M44480: Aletkina’s Motion for extension of time for perfecting leave motion; HSC opposed, heard Nov. 28, 2014, Justice LaForme - granted
(13). Docket M44600: Aletkina’s Motion for extension of time for perfecting leave motion; for permission of large factum; for advise on public organization to be co-plaintiff in defending sick children’s right for life and safety in the Hospital. HSC opposed, heard Nov. 28, 2014, Justice Cronk – granted, failed: (1) to order capacity assessment; (2) failed to give advice on co-plaintiff for defending sick children’s right for life and safety;
(14) Docket M44776 – Aletkina’s Motion for directions to capacity assessor re: forensic assessment of past and current capacity and appointment of PGT; HSC opposed, heard Mar. 5, 2015, Huscroft – failed to make any decision, until Feb. 12, 2016
(15) Docket M 44743: Aletkina’s Motion (1) for permission to file TIMELY served leave materials that could not be filed timely due to illness; (2) for permission to amend the timely (Feb. 13, 2015) served Factum, in the light of Amended Notice of Motion for Leave to Appeal, with new key grounds for appeal. HSC opposed, heard Mar. 5, 2015, Justice Huscroft - dismissed, made findings in the absence of any filed materials, conflicting with facts / evidence in "directions' motion", conflicting with the law; he refused to adjourn to allow drafting materials; he moved the planned for Mar. 25, 2015 extension of time motion to Mar. 5, 2015, to combine with the "directions motion".
(16) Docket M44837: Aletkina’s Motion (1) for Review of order of Huscroft (incl. that he omitted to give directions to capacity assessor), and (2) for directions to [forensic] capacity assessor, and for appointment of PGT. HSC opposed, heard June 24, 2015, Laskin, van Rensburg, Brown – dismissed. Omitted to give directions to forensic capacity assessor and on appointment of PGT.
(17) Docket M44324: Aletkina’s Motion for (1) ordering forensic assessment of past and current capacity, (2) for stay of all proceedings and costs until capacity is assessed; (3) stay by appeal in SCC , HSC opposed, Justice Roberts - dismissed, contravened Acts of Parliament (crime)
(18) Docket M44385: Aletkina’s Motion for Review of order of Roberts, HSC opposed, heard Nov. 2, 2016 – Hoy (ACJO), Justices MacFarland, Lauwers – adjourned on Aletkina’s request – unable to speak- mentally impaired, went to attend the hospital’s ER for treatment, HSC opposed to adjournment – adjournment granted till Nov. 3, 2016.
(19) Docket M44385: Aletkina’s Motion for Review of order of Roberts, HSC opposed, heard Nov. 3, 2016 – Hoy (ACJO), Justices MacFarland, Lauwers - dismissed. Contravened Acts of Parliament (crime)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CONSPIRACY of the ONCA administration and the judges, as the key important motion for directions to forensic past capacity assessor M44776 filed on Feb. 25, 2015 was maliciously omitted to be decided by Huscroft, Laskin, van Rensburg, Brown until February 12, 2016. Amended Orders were issued unlawfully, as the Reasons do not give grounds for issuing amended orders; (2) amended orders issued with fabricated :issued” date of November 4, 2015 as these amended orders did not exist until Feb. 12, 2016. All was targeting victimizing Aletkina. Sarah Sutherland (CanLII Manager, Content and Partnerships, involved in conspiracy, removing need to Aletkina case law)
V. Supreme Court of Canada, (1) Applications for Leave to Appeal, File 36521 (from ONCA M44837, M44743, M44446) and New Un-numbered Application (from ONCA Amended M44776, M837, M743, leave M44446), (2) Application File 36871 (from ONCA M45324, M44385, directly affecting leave motion ONCA M44446
(20) File 36521: Aletkina’s Motion filed on Sept. 21, 2015 (3 days before SCC timeframe expired) for (1) stay of SCC proceedings until ONCA proceedings complete; (2) extend time to serve and file Amended Application; (3) Combine several ONCA in one application. HSC opposed, heard October 30, 2015, Justice Gascon – dismissed. Nov. 17, 2015, Justice Gascon – Amended order; Application is brought to an end, filing more materials is prohibited, Registrar to return materials.
(21) File 36871, Aletkina’s Motion to file large Memorandum, to extend time to file large amended memorandum, and to adduce fresh key important medical and other evidence. HSC opposed, heard June 2, 2016, Justices Abella, Karakatsanis, Brown – GRANTED are: large Memorandum, extension of time; DISMISSED: all fresh evidence. No reason, no grounds disclosed.
(22) File 36871, Aletkina’s Application from ONCA M45324, M44385, directly affecting the leave motion ONCA M44446. HSC opposed, heard June 2, 2016, Justices Abella, Karakatsanis, Brown – dismissed
(23) File 36871, Aletkina’s Application from ONCA M45324, M44385, directly affecting the leave motion ONCA M44446. HSC opposed, heard June 2, 2016, Justices Abella, Karakatsanis, Brown – dismissed
(24) File – Un-numbered, Aletkina’s Application, timely filed April 15, 2016 after illness, from ONCA Amended Order’ from issued on Feb. 12, 2016 ONCA Amended Orders of Huscroft, Laskin et. al. on M44776, M837, M743, directly affecting ONCA leave motion M44446), HSC opposed, Jul. 7, 2016, HSC opposed, not heard, Justice Cromwell - Proceeding is vexatious, prohibited from filing any materials Registrar Bilodeau – dismissed
(25) All three Applications – Aletkina’s [ Combined] Reconsideration Motion, opposed, on Sept. 9, 2016 dismissed by SCC Registrar Bilodeau – “satisfied that the filing of further documents would be vexatious” -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL, the courts of five level, twenty eight+ ‘justice system participants’: 1 OLRB adjudicator, 3 masters, 7 judges in SCDC, 10 judges in ONCA, 5 judges in SCC +SCC Registrar) involved, heard 25 proceedings, with two repeating main issues:
ISSUE # 1. Was Aletkina in 2010 – 2011 legally disabled and incapable of representing herself in complex legal action?
If yes, the amended pleadings are tenable.
The Hospital would be ordered to pay Aletkina’s legal costs.
Affects entire action. Trial cannot happen without qualified proper opinion of forensic psychologist.
The judges, registrars, senor legal officers, chief justices contravened the letter and the spirit of the Acts of Parliament / Statute Laws by refusing to order forensic assessment of past and current capacity assessment of mentally ill self-represented party, and by refusing to give directions to the psychologist-assessor, and so they denied to Aletkina integrity of judicial and court process. The orders cannot stand.
ISSUE #2. Had Aletkina in 2012 – 2016 restricted capacity, and was incapable in principle of meeting the courts’ due dates for drafting, serving and filing materials?
She was in 2012-2016 capable under SDA, but had restricted capacity under Rule 7 (unable to meet due dates).
The courts had to:
(1) Accommodate her with sufficient extension of time, based that she met the Test, Canada (Attorney General) v. Hennelly, 1999 Canlll 8190 (FCA), para. 17:
1) a continuing intention to pursue his or her application; [Aletkina demonstrated diligence, always filing materials when the extension of time is granted, unless medical condition prevented her from that;]
2) that the application has some merit; [all proceeding and action have strong merits: because all her pre-trial proceedings, and the action as a whole contain the matters of Statute laws / Acts of Parliament: Sec. 105, 107, 121 of the Courts of Justice Act, Rule7 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, Limitations Act–sec. 7, OHSA, ESA, Criminal Code: Sec. 79, 80, 81, 83.14, full Part IV–Offences against the administration of Law and Justice, incl. 126, 128, 131, 132, 134,137,138, 139, 141, 181, 217,218, 219, 221, 224,229, 231,239, 672, and sec. 46 in respect to Canada’s criminal activity abroad violating international laws]
3) that no prejudice to the respondent arises from the delay; [wasting time, since 2013, when Aletkina asked Master McAffee to make an order to Aletkina’s doctors to assess capacity [under Rule 7] and till 2017 (4 years) – works for New Proposed Defendants, as their age is old, they can escape legal responsibility by passing away, and Aletkina would not have them as defendants or witnesses on the Trial.
4) that a reasonable explanation for the delay exists’[Aletkina is mentally ill, disabled under ODSP, intellectually slow, with cognitive impairments, not always able “to understand info” and to “appreciate outcomes”, suffers severe/acute muscle spasms, incapacitation completely at times of high stress caused by strict due dates for filing materials. In addition, the Hospital employed a tactics of distracting Aletkina; endlessly arguing about draft orders (took one full month in July-August 2015 to argue about draft order of Huscroft and of Laskin et. al. The ONCA engaged in conspiracy against Aletkina and was concealing her Letters to the Registrar where she provided proofs of medical condition and proof of timely service of materials, asking to allow filing timely served materials. The ONCA argued almost for 1 year about the need for Amended Order of Huscroft and Of Laskin ET. al. – See Records-Vol. VII, Finally, on Feb. 12, 2016, ONCA committed fabrication of the ‘issued date’ on Amended Orders, making it Nov. 4, 2016, while the orders were in fact issued on Feb. 12, 2016. Crime against administration of law and justice).
(2) order Aletkina’s current capacity assessment by the clinical psychologist under Rule 7 , sec. 105 of the CJA, and on 626381 Ontario Ltd. v. Kagan , Shastri, 2013 ONSC 4114 (CanLII) - paras. 15 (the purpose of Rule 7) paras. 15, 16; To determine the funding by the office of the Ontario Attorney General or by the Defendant Hospital, as Aletkina, ODSP member, has no own funds to pay to forensic psychologist (about $4,000). If confirmed incapable, appoint the PGT;
(3) to give directions to the psychologist for assessing mentally ill self-represented litigant with no funds to hire a lawyer (who, in his turn, would have referred Aletkina to the forensic assessor and would have given directions); the Law Help Ontario refused to give the doctor directions for assessment, the Legal Clinics refused, the doctors refused to assess without the Order and without court’s directions; the forensic psychologists and psychiatrists refused to assess without court’s order and directions.
(4) provide advice to enable mentally ill Aletkina to fairly represent herself; based on case law Kainz v. Potter, 2006, CanLII 20532 (ONSC), paras. 60, 65, 66, 67: "Self- represented parties are entitled to receive assistance from an adjudicator...directions on procedures, evidence, witnesses..." The judges did not provide assistance.
INVOLVED JUDGES, who contravened the Acts of Parliament within non-trial / pre-trial proceedings are: Judges Thomas Albert Cromwell, Rosalie Silberman Abella, Andromache Karakatsanis, Russell Brown, Clement Gascon, Alexandra Hoy (ACJO), Jean L. MacFarland, Peter D. Lauwers, Lois B. Roberts; John I. Laskin, Katherine van Rensburg, David M. Brown; Grant Huscroft; Eleanore A. Cronk; David L. Corbett; Alison Harvison Young, master Barbara McAfee, master Joan M. Haberman. The ONCA and SCC Registrars, Senior Legal Officers / Case Analyst, Chief Justices, MPPs, MPs, Minister(s) of Health, Minster of Justice and Attorney General of Canada, Ontario Attorney General, seem to be involved against Aletkina.
There were masters and judges who DID NOT contravene the Acts of Parliament, were not biased, not partial: Master Ronald Dash, Judges Susan G. Himel, Charles T. Hackland, Theodore Matlow, Frances P. Kiteley, Harry LaForme (6).
The participants of the ‘criminal organization’ make 83% (30 out of 36 individuals). The unbiased and impartial judges Matlow and Hackland resigned/retired immediately after delivering a just and fair decision. Were they forced by the criminal organization to resign / retire?
WHY TWENTY SEVEN judges needed not to be straightforward on the issue of capacity / incapacity of mentally ill self-represented party, why they contravened the Acts of Parliament, committed multiple criminal offences against administration of law and justice, fabricating the findings, the dates, the relevance, denying Aletkina judicial integrity / court integrity, and victimizing Aletkina?