Singh-Strzelinski v Canada, 2021 ABQB 668

Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta Citation: Singh-Strzelinski v Canada, 2021 ABQB 668 Date: 20210820 Docket: 2001 04910 Registry: Calgary Between: Robert Maximilian Singh-Strzelinski Plaintiff - and - Government of Canada, Ottawa, Canada Defendant _______________________________________________________ Memorandum of Decision of the Associate Chief Justice J.D. Rooke _______________________________________________________ [ 1 ] On March 31, 2020, Robert Maximilian Singh-Strzelinski [Mr.

Singh-Strzelinski] filed with the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench a Statement of Claim that names “Government of Canada, Ottawa, Canada” [Canada] as the Defendant. The body of Mr. Singh- Strezelinski’s Statement of Claim reads: 1. I was unjustly, arrested, Accused and condemned to Eight Years and four months in Panama. After four years of prison I was inform by Vice Consul of Canada Debora Herrera that Justice of Panama lost my Original File and that I'm free to go.

I did return to Canada on 18 April 2018.

I accuse Canada Government for; - accessory to false imprisonment; - Accessory to false Accusation; - Accessory to false Condemnation; - Accessory to expose me to eight attempt of murders against me; - Accessory to expose me to many attempts of rape against me; - Accessory to expose me to many attempt of forcible conversion attempts; of money landering - Attempt by Vice Consul of Canada for money laundering; though Polish Government every three months were giving me 100 USD (hundred USD); - Accessory to expose me to starvation; because I'm vegetarian and Panama Justice Penitentiary system do not have vegetarian dieta.

All together in four years and four months i was not eating 365 days ... first time 107 days i was surviving on water, then six times forty days I was protesting each time 40 days, because only during those forty days I felt no poisoned. Authority were mixing pig fat and meat with rice. I do have allergy to meat and on the other hand I'm Sikh. 2. Canada Government for been Accessory to all accusations above broke Human Rights Agreements signed in UN, disrespectful Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms 1982 Canadian constitutional legislation.

Disrespectful The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) (formally the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms) is an international convention to protect human rights and political freedoms in Europe. Drafted in 1950 by the then newly formed Council of Europe,[1] the convention entered into force on 3 September 1953. Because I'm Naturalize Canadian and Citizen of Poland - European Union. [Sic.] [ 2 ] On this basis Mr. Singh-Strezelinski seeks: 5. Because of unjustifiable imprisonment I lost my Property, Salaries. all together Lost one million eight thousand Can Dollars.

I request recompense my loses for time been of imprisonment, for time after obtaining freedom, because up to now I'm not able to begin my work as Owner Operator of my business Princess Strzelinski Transport INC. Registry Alberta and Ontario causing me problem to renew my professional Permit. 6. If Canada Government will not comply with satisfying judgment I will open Court Case at Strasbourg International Tribunal of Human Rights in Germany or Affiliated with Authority. [Sic.] [ 3 ] Counsel for the Department of Justice, which is representing the Defendant Canada, on March 23, 2021, by letter, referred Mr.

Singh-Strzelinski’s Statement of Claim as a candidate Apparently Vexatious Application or Proceeding [AVAP] pursuant to Civil Practice Note No. 7 [CPN7] paragraph 6. I am designated to receive and review potential CPN7 processes in Southern Alberta. [ 4 ] After review of Mr. Singh-Strzelinski’s Statement of Claim, I concluded, in a decision reported as Singh-Strzelinski v Canada , 2021 ABQB 613 [ Singh-Strzelinski #1 ] , that the Statement of Claim exhibited multiple prima facie fatal defects, and, therefore, should be subject to a document-based show-cause procedure.

Singh-Strzelinski #1 , at para 15 , invited Mr. Singh-Strzelinski to submit an up to ten-page Written Submission to explain how the Statement of Claim is not an abuse of the Court, because the Statement of Claim apparently fails to provide adequate particulars so that the Court and Defendant can make a meaningful response. [ 5 ] The deadline for Mr. Singh-Strzelinski to make a Written Submission has passed. No response has been received. I, therefore, conclude that Mr.

Singh-Strzelinski has not rebutted the Singh-Strzelinski # 1 prima facie conclusion that the Statement of Claim is a hopeless and abusive proceeding. Accordingly, I order the Docket 2001 04910 Statement of Claim is struck out pursuant to CPN7 para 3(

c) and Alberta Rules of Court , Alta Reg 124/2010 Rule 3.68.

[ 6 ] When an action, application, or claim is terminated via the CPN7 process, the usual practice of this Court is to award costs in favour of the litigant who referred the matter to the Court: e.g. Ahad v Calgary Housing Company , 2020 ABQB 450 at para 9 ; Phillips v Kenney , 2020 ABQB 452 at para 9 ; Skrypichayko v Law Society of Alberta , 2020 ABQB 604 at para 43 ; Feeney v Alberta , 2020 ABQB 633 at para 6 . I see no reason to depart from that approach in this instance. Taking into account

Schedule C of the Alberta Rules of Court , I order Mr. Singh-Strzelinski pay Canada $1,000 in costs, forthwith. [ 7 ] Counsel for Canada will prepare the Order giving effect to this decision. Mr. Singh-Strzelinski’s approval of that Order is dispensed with, pursuant to Rule 9.4(2)(c). Dated at the City of Calgary, Alberta this 20 th day of August, 2021. J.D. Rooke A.C.J.C.Q.B.A. Appearances: Tessa la Bastida Attorney General of Canada for the Defendant Canada