From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: In my appeal of Justice Phelan's refusal to life the $250   
   cap on reimbursement for the compulsory auditor's letter for a   
   null return, the Crown insisted on a transcript of the whole   
   hearing, with their 300 page affidavit in the appeal book.   
      
   Jacob Pollice consented to my filing it as a PDF. So I made a   
   PDF of my 500 page Appeal Book and served it on the Crown but   
   the Court balked. Said I needed to make a motion to use PDF.   
      
   So I filed a motion to submit the 500-page Appeal Book as a   
   PDF and included how the Crown had consented.   
      
   On Dec 8 2016, Federal Court of Appeal Justice Wyman W. Webb   
   ruled:   
      
   Docket A-202-16   
   Ottawa, December 8 2016   
   Present: Webb, J.A.   
      
   BETWEEN   
                            JOHN TURMEL   
                                                     Appellant   
                                and   
                       HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN   
                                                    Respondent   
      
                               ORDER   
      
      
   J: WHEREAS the Appellant had previously attempted to file the   
   appeal book by a USB key;   
      
   AND WHEREAS by a direction dated November 17 2016, the   
   Appellant was notified that "the appeal book must be filed in   
   paper form and must be formatted in a particular way" and if   
   he wanted to file any part of the appeal book in electronic   
   form he would have to bring a motion in writing;   
      
   AND WHEREAS the Appellant subsequently submitted for filing a   
   document which does not conform to the requirements of Rule   
   364, to request that he be permitted to file the appeal book   
   by USB key and that he be granted extension of time to file   
   the appeal book;   
      
   JCT: The irregularity is   
                          RECORD OF MOTION   
                             (Rule 369)   
   TABLE OF CONTENTS   
   1. Notice of Motion   
   2. Affidavit   
      
                          NOTICE OF MOTION   
                             (Rule 369)   
      
   TAKE NOTICE THAT Appellant John Turmel will make a motion to   
   the Court in writing under Rule 369 of the Federal Courts   
   Rules.   
   THE MOTION IS FOR a Order permitting the filing of the Appeal   
   Book by USB key and extension of time to file.   
   THE GROUNDS FOR THE MOTION ARE that the contents of the   
   Appeal Book have been agreed upon and the Respondent consents   
   to the service of the Appeal Book by USB key.   
   AND FOR ANY ORDER abridging or extending time for service,   
   or amending any defect as to form or content that this   
   Honorable Court may permit so justice be done.   
   DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE will be the Affidavit of the Appellant.   
   Dated at Brantford on Nov 28 2016.   
      
                       APPELLANT'S AFFIDAVIT   
                             (Rule 369)   
      
   I, John C. Turmel, residing at 50 Brant Ave in Brantford   
   Ontario make oath as follows:   
   Ex. A is the emailled consent of the Respondent to the service   
   of the Appeal Book by USB key.   
      
   JCT: The irregularity is clearly shown in the TABLE OF   
   CONTENTS   
   1. Notice of Motion   
   2. Affidavit   
   3. WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS (missing)   
      
   The Written Representations explain how the evidence in the   
   Affidavit supports the motion. Here, the motion was so trivial   
   and the Affidavit so complete, I didn't see the need for more   
   explanation of why I wanted to go USB instead of a 500-page   
   pack of paper. I would have said:   
      
                      WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS   
   Since the Court makes PDFs of paper documents for their   
   files, it would save the Registry staff's time to scan the   
   500-page document to PDF by having the document submitted by   
   PDF already.   
      
   JCT: So, because I didn't explain to him the advantage for his   
   Registry staff, he notes the "irregularity!"   
      
   J: AND WHEREAS by letter received Dec 1 2016 the Appellant   
   requested that "any irregularities in a motion be amended";   
      
   JCT: The letter pointed out I had used the Magic Open-Says-Me   
   Words: "AND FOR ANY ORDER abridging or extending time for   
   service, or amending any defect as to form or content that   
   this Honorable Court may permit so justice be done" which   
   basically ask he ignore what may be ignored or amend what may   
   be amended to get the motion heard. Never fails. Worked at the   
   Supreme Court of Canada earlier this year. We'll see here.   
      
   J: AND WHEREAS the Respondent has consented to receiving the   
   appeal book by USB key but does not take any position in   
   relation to the Appellant's motion to permit him to file the   
   appeal book by USB key with the Court.   
      
   JCT: The Rules say:   
      
   Filing of Documents   
   Sending documents for filing   
      
   71 (1) A document may be sent to the Registry for the purpose   
   of filing by delivery, mail, fax or electronic transmission.   
      
   Sending by electronic transmission - document format   
      
   (4) A document that is sent by electronic transmission shall   
   be in PDF (Portable Document Format) or any other format that   
   is approved by the Court.   
      
   Paper copies - fax or electronic transmission   
   72.2 A person who files a document by fax or electronic   
   transmission shall, if required by the Court, provide the   
   Registry with the same number of paper copies of the document   
   as would have been required had the document been filed in   
   paper copy.   
      
   JCT: It seems the real issue is USB key rather than Email. I   
   figured giving it to them in PDF format was electronic service   
   but maybe the Court never considered that technology.   
      
   J: AND WHEREAS by Order dated Sep 2 2016, the Appellant's   
   motion "for an Order allowing the substitution of an audio CD   
   for the paper transcript before the Federal Court on May 10   
   2016" was dismissed with costs and therefore paper copies of   
   the transcripts are to be submitted;   
      
   JCT: No, there was no Order that paper transcripts be   
   submitted, only the rejection of the Court's own CD. Whether   
   the Appeal Book which includes the transcript is   
   electronically served is an other issue. I did obtain a paper   
   transcript which was then added to the PDF.   
      
   J: AND WHEREAS the Appellant has not provided any indication   
   of how the documents would be organized or labelled on the USB   
   key;   
      
   JCT: There was only one PDF file on the USB key! He wanted an   
   explanation of how that 1 file would be organized or labelled?   
   Imagine I'd sent the Appeal Book by email, there would have   
   been no instructions on how the PDF was organized.   
      
   J: NOW THEREFORE THE COURT ORDERS that:   
      
   (a) The document submitted as a "Record of Motion" is accepted   
   as a motion record for permission to file the appeal book by   
   USB key;   
      
   JCT: Open Says Me words work their magic again. There really   
   is nothing they can do when amending trivial stuff is pre-   
   requested.   
      
   J: (b) This motion for permission to file the appeal book by   
   USB key is dismissed and the Appellant shall file 5 paper   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)