Alberta Queens' Bench spanks the fed re: S74 jurisdiction

[MikeTheRock]

from my understanding and i could be wrong but I Figure any formerly NR firearm that was NR 13 months before the OIC , is not bannable. I say this because I thought a classification of a firearm could only be changed "within" one year of it's original classification entry in the FRT. Unless the firearm is modified to suit an alternate classification.... ie changing barrel length.
So as far as I am concerned, I don't see how the turd and his merry band of gun banners can change the classifications of any firearms i may or may not own.

This is not true. Nobody should read this and think a NR caught in the OIC is not prohibited. That was not an argument in the case and cannot be accomplished by a S.74 reference.

[metamatt]

This is not true. Nobody should read this and think a NR caught in the OIC is not prohibited. That was not an argument in the case and cannot be accomplished by a S.74 reference.

it may be true for NR's that weren't named in OIC that have subsequently been changed to prohibited in the FRT

that has nothing to do with this decision or s74 hearings though

[MikeTheRock]

Correct - whether a NR is caught by the OIC is a totally different issue than the results of this case. That is why I used that qualifier I just didn't want people to read that and think they can run out and use their NR (if caught by the OIC) without any potential risk or consequence

As the Judge alluded, there are at least two different "decisions" being made here by the Registrar. The first is whether your firearm is named in the OIC / caught by the OIC. The second is the revocation of certs.

It is important to note the only result of the case is that there was a revocation and the Provincial Court can hear the reference. No substantive ruling has been made affecting anything to do with the OIC.

Even when the reference hearing in this case is heard the above issue about what is caught by the OIC likely won't be an issue since as far as I know all firearms involved were specifically named in the OIC.

[Canuck44]

I retired Judge here in Terrace and I were discussing a case a few years ago. In our discussions a ruling in Ontario regarding the subject we were discussing, had been affirmed by the Supreme Court of Ontario. He said that unless the Ontario ruling we appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada and reversed, the Ontario ruling was in fact the accepted law for all the Provinces. He said, that it was extremely rare, read near never the case, where when a court of equal stature would rule differently on the same set of circumstances. I believe our discussion involved the status of Antique forearms.

This is great news. Just reading the quoted comments above leads me to believe the OIC and the revocation are doomed. What the a Judge seems to be saying is you can't run end runs around the Law ie the Firearms Act out of convenience. This rational, if confirmed, could easily be applied to other, more important items on Trudeaus agenda. Boy Wonder may be opening a can of worms and a road he advisors may not want to walk.eg Incursions into Provincial Jurisdictions laid down in our Constitution.

If the Feds lose it should end this nonsense. I say that because the last thing Trudeau needs is another wedge issue that will enflames portions of his base.

IF I owned or processed either classified firearm falling under the OIC I would be dancing in the streets right now.

Now where are my running shoes and record player....

Take Care
Bob
ps For the folks born after 1980 "record players" are,....... awe forget it, you can look it up.



Take Care

Bob

[MikeTheRock]

For those thinking about filing for a s. 74 hearing, you should be prepared to to make actual arguments at the hearing that are properly presented and supported by evidence, case law/statute and good logic. It would be detrimental to have a mountain of s.74 cases decided against the applicant because they weren't prepared and didn't make a robust argument. That was a big hurdle in the cases fighting about jurisdiction.

Note at the reference hearing itself the burden is on the applicant to show the revocation was not reasonable. Simply asserting it is not reasonable will not get you there.

[MikeTheRock]

@Canuck44 - I think Justice Poelman's reasoning about not being able to do indirectly what cannot be done directly is a strong argument that should be made in Federal Court on the issue of variants. Hopefully the decision helps them on that point.

[Kaberday]

Correct - whether a NR is caught by the OIC is a totally different issue than the results of this case. That is why I used that qualifier I just didn't want people to read that and think they can run out and use their NR (if caught by the OIC) without any potential risk or consequence

As the Judge alluded, there are at least two different "decisions" being made here by the Registrar. The first is whether your firearm is named in the OIC / caught by the OIC. The second is the revocation of certs.

It is important to note the only result of the case is that there was a revocation and the Provincial Court can hear the reference. No substantive ruling has been made affecting anything to do with the OIC.

Even when the reference hearing in this case is heard the above issue about what is caught by the OIC likely won't be an issue since as far as I know all firearms involved were specifically named in the OIC.

Can you elaborate a little on this please. Let say someone has an NR that was not on the OIC but banned by the po po after wards. If the firearm had an NR classification more than year prior, does this mean that the Po Po reclassification in this particular instance wount hold water in court?

[Cameron SS]

yeah runkle didnt say that yet but this is my thought.

so now we must get formal notice (at some point) and then we collectively file 64,000 s74 hearings. Is this the idea?

Well we dont knownif the registrar will decide to properly revoke 69,000 certificates, or only the 200 or so that filed s74s the first time.

Generally if you dont oppose something it is assumed that you accept it. Anyone who didnt file a s74 the first time can be presumed to have taken no issue with the automatic nullification, which includes a few gun orgs.

The judges ruling only applies the 9 applicants who were at issue before that judge.

And it remains to be seen whether the government will appeal this ruling or not.

In the mean time, I wouldnt wait around for the registrar to send another letter. If you havent already filed a s74 to challenge the July 2020 nullification letter, than there is an argument to be made that the door to file is once again open.

[Cameron SS]

@Canuck44 - I think Justice Poelman's reasoning about not being able to do indirectly what cannot be done directly is a strong argument that should be made in Federal Court on the issue of variants. Hopefully the decision helps them on that point.

It does not in any way.

[Cameron SS]

Can you elaborate a little on this please. Let say someone has an NR that was not on the OIC but banned by the po po after wards. If the firearm had an NR classification more than year prior, does this mean that the Po Po reclassification in this particular instance wount hold water in court?

First, be specific. What is Po Po.
Second, there is a different between the civilian public service administrators at the Canadian Firearms Program and the Police.
Third, police dont classify anything. They never have and they never will. Learn how the law works.

Only a Judge can yell you what the classification of a firearm is. Everything else is just opinion.
When the CFP or Registrar tells you the classification of a firearm, thats her opinion. When the RCMP SFSS publish the FRT, thats their opinion.

When a Police officer finds you on the side of the road and looks at your gun, they form an opinion.

Only a judge can declare whose opinion is correct.

The OiC did not ban a single firearm. The OiC changed the rules for how firearms are to be classified. Whether any particular firearm's class has changed as a result is a matter of opinion, until a judge says so.

In the 200 S74 hearings over nullifications, not one judge has agreed that the applicants firearms were in proven to be captured under the OiC.

In the Federal Court challenges the Government and some of the applicants argued that the federal court cannot review the opinions of the rcmp sfss as to which firearms are captured and which arent, and the federal court refused to do.

It is possible that millions of guns or perhaps every gun in canada is captured under the new rules per the OiC. Its equally possible that the RCMP do not have the information necessary to prove that even a single firearm is captured under the OiC.

Whats clear from all of these various challenges is that the government is terrified of havibg the rcmps opinions subjected to judicial scrutiny.