From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   TURMEL: Appealing Phelan not lifting $250 auditor cap   
      
   JCT: My last article TURMEL: Phelan won't lift $250 cap on   
   election audit fees covered, I parsed his decision.   
   https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.fan.john-turmel/kJ20SGivK4k   
      
   JCT: This is the Notice of Appeal   
      
      
                                           File No: A-________   
                      FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL   
   Between:   
                            JOHN TURMEL   
                                                     Plaintiff   
                                AND   
                       HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   
                                                     Defendant   
      
                          NOTICE OF APPEAL   
      
   TO THE RESPONDENT:   
      
        A LEGAL PROCEEDING HAS BEEN COMMENCED AGAINST YOU by   
   the appellant. The relief claimed by the appellant appears   
   on the following page.   
      
        THIS APPEAL will be heard by the Court at a time and   
   place to be fixed by the Judicial Administrator. Unless the   
   Court directs otherwise, the place of hearing will be as   
   requested by the appellant. The appellant requests that this   
   appeal be heard at (place where Federal Court of Appeal (or   
   Federal Court) ordinarily sits).   
      
        IF YOU WISH TO OPPOSE THIS APPEAL, to receive notice of   
   any step in the appeal or to be served with any documents in   
   the appeal, you or a solicitor acting for you must prepare a   
   notice of appearance in Form 341 prescribed by the Federal   
   Courts Rules and serve it on the appellant's solicitor, or   
   where the appellant is self-represented, on the appellant,   
   WITHIN 10 DAYS of being served with this notice of appeal.   
      
        IF YOU INTEND TO SEEK A DIFFERENT DISPOSITION of the   
   order appealed from, you must serve and file a notice of   
   cross-appeal in Form 341 prescribed by the Federal Courts   
   Rules instead of serving and filing a notice of appearance.   
      
        Copies of the Federal Courts Rules information   
   concerning the local offices of the Court and other   
   necessary information may be obtained on request to the   
   Administrator of this Court at Ottawa (telephone 613-992-   
   4238) or at any local office.   
      
        IF YOU FAIL TO OPPOSE THIS APPEAL, JUDGMENT MAY BE   
   GIVEN IN YOUR ABSENCE AND WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE TO YOU.   
      
   (Date)   
      
   Issued by:________________________________   
   (Registry Officer)   
      
   Address of local office:__________________   
      
      
   TO: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   
      
                               APPEAL   
      
        THE APPELLANT APPEALS to the Federal Court of Appeal   
   from the order of Phelan J. dated May 12 2016 (T-561-15) by   
   which the court ordered the action dismissed with costs.   
      
        THE APPELLANT ASKS that the decision be overturned and   
   the 35-year-old reimbursement cap of $250 set in S.477.75 of   
   the Canada Elections Act be struck qas unconstitutionally   
   limiting the right or to participate in the electoral process.   
      
        THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL are that the learned judge erred in   
   ruling:   
      
   1. Applicant's situation is not a "reasonable hypothetical" as   
   basis for Charter analysis when it is for the sub-class of   
   candidates filing "nil returns;   
      
   - no appreciable interference with Applicant's capacity to   
   play a meaningful role in the electoral process which depends   
   on the financial status of the decider;   
      
   - there was no right to public funding for a government-   
   imposed requirement that a summation of zeroes be audited;   
      
   - no appreciable interference shown yet when the issue is   
   impediment in the future;   
      
   - no likelihood of appreciable interference in future when   
   there should be no interference at all;   
      
   - the Supreme Court cautions not to deal with the hypothetical   
   but does not bar such decision if the court can handle the   
   hypothetical.   
      
   Dated at Toronto on June ____ 2016.   
      
   ______________________________   
   Applicant   
   John C. Turmel, B.Eng.,   
      
   JCT: I think making me have an auditor to check the addition   
   of my zeros is fine, just don't make me pay for it. Phelan   
   seems to think that until I'm hurt, I can't complain. But as   
   the rules say, judges sharp enough to deal with the   
   hypothetical may and I should have had a judge who could.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)