Even without knowing the full contents of that document, it seems that Patrick -- as an undischarged bankrupt without a trustee -- should have had some difficulty doing this, since Canada's bankruptcy laws state fairly clearly that someone in Patrick's position has no right to file such an action.
Here's how one website explains it:
Now, I am not a lawyer so I am not going to opine on the niggling details of whether the above restrictions apply to Patrick's case, and certainly Patrick is free to argue before the court regarding whether it does or not. But we can certainly back up and ask a much, much simpler question:
Did Patrick reveal his status in his Statement of Claim?
Whether Patrick can persuasively argue that someone in his situation still has the right to file such an action is one thing, but it is quite another thing to not even mention his current status as a trustee-less undischarged bankrupt who additionally has been kicked out of bankruptcy for perpetual non-compliance.
If Patrick wants to file and argue a defamation action like the above, well, he can always try. But if he filed that Statement of Claim while deliberately concealing his status as an undischarged bankrupt, I'm thinking that is not going to end well once that is brought to the attention of the Court. In short, it behooves us to wait for the availability of the above Statement of Claim in its entirety to see if Patrick tried to do an end run around Canada's bankruptcy laws, and what the possible consequences are.
Let's watch.
5 comments:
Offhand, I expect it will take a while for Patrick to actually serve those documents on the alleged libellers.
... and then the amusing bits start.
MgS: I am speculating wildly here, but I don't think we need to wait until legal and proper service on anyone; the mere *filing* of that Statement of Claim with the Court, if Patrick did not disclose his status as an undischarged bankrupt, strikes me as sufficient for him to be in a world of trouble.
From a legal perspective, yes, the mere filing of a Statement of Claim with no legal basis is enough to get you into trouble. If someone is running a criminal background check (or even a credit check) on you, that Statement of Claim will show up and could result in you being denied a job, or a loan, or a mortgage. That is absolutely grounds for a counter-suit for defamation, and possibly massive damages depending on whether you could prove that you were harmed.
Certainly, if Patrick filed that lawsuit fraudulently, not only would that claim be tossed, but Peter would be totally entitled to all costs he incurred in responding to it, and there might even be criminal charges against Patrick.
How stupid *is* that guy?
CC, ... whatever else happens, you are probably going to be famous in Canadian jurisprudence for being associated with this case. I think the sheer weight of legal insanity that the young gentleman has brought upon himself is unprecedented.
thwap: Your humorous comment is truer than you might know. As far back as 2014, the registrar in bankruptcy, in her ruling related to Patrick's discharge hearing:
https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skqb/doc/2014/2014skqb352/2014skqb352.html
wrote:
"What is the appropriate disposition of the bankruptcy discharge application given the unique circumstances of this bankruptcy?"
Note well the word "unique": even the registrar was dumbfounded by the level of dumbassitude on Patrick's part that she had never encountered before, and it's only gotten worse since then.
I have been assured that this case is, on a regular basis, establishing legal precedent involving just how fucked up someone's bankruptcy can get, and how to deal with it.
Post a Comment