Silence! Apotex, A Doctor And Freedom Of Speech
24 CommentsBy Ed Silverman // December 12th, 2008 // 9:06 am
Four years after an agreement supposedly ended a decade-long dispute between a Toronto physician Nancy Olivieri and Apotex, which accused her of badmouthing one of its drug, a new lawsuit has been filed by the drugmaker - and the Canadian Association of University Teachers is now accusing Apotex of trying to muzzle academic freedom.
The CAUT says Apotex is trying to silence Olivieri, because its lawsuit, which was filed last month, lists a very broad range of examples in which the drugmaker claims the professor breached their 2004 agreement “not to disparate each other,” according to The Globe and Mail. The lawsuit cites such alleged infractions as attending conferences, chairing panels and having an entry in Wikipedia.”
“What is so worrisome is that Apotex seems to be trying to define disparagement so broadly,” Jim Turk, CAUT’s executive director, tells the paper. “In Dr. Olivieri’s case, it means not only can she not talk about the factual things that happened to her, she can’t participate in conferences on academic freedom where there is no reference to her case at all. To be threatened with serious legal action in this way essentially means the only option is to be silent” (Here is the Apotex lawsuit, the claims against Olivieri, the CAUT statement and a statement from the Canadian Health Coalition).
The dispute goes back to the mid-1990s, when Olivieri participated in studies on deferiprone, which is also known as Ferriprox and is used to treat a rare blood disorder. She expressed concerns that “other experts in the field (have told Apotex) were unfounded,” according to the recently filed lawsuit. An Apotex lawyer couldn’t be reached for comment, the paper adds.
The lawsuit says Olivieri began a media campaign to cast herself as “the whistleblower hero in a saga against an evil drug company,” in order to gain public sympathy. In 2000, she began a defamation action against Apotex and others, and the drugmaker launched a countersuit, all of which were addressed in the 2004 settlement, the paper writes.
The new lawsuit argues Olivieri has since been involved in a list of speaking engagements and publications in which she “either directly disparaged Apotex and/or deferiprone or acquiesced or consented to the disparagement,” according to the Globe and Mail, adding that the drugmaker asks for $500,000 in damages and none of the charges have been proved in court.
The suit lists 35 examples of what it describes as breaches to the settlement, including an entry in Wikipedia that describes her “protracted struggle” with Apotex and a website posting that promotes a movie script in development on the story, the paper writes.
The new action comes at the same time as Olivieri continues to work through the courts to have the terms of the 2004 settlement enforced, the paper continues. Last week, Justice George Strathy of the Ontario Superior Court ordered Apotex to perform all the terms of the settlement, including a $800,000 payment to the doctor, a sum that until last week was not public.
“There is a disagreement about what is disparaging and that will presumably have to be decided in this new action,” Paul Mitchell, Olivieri’s lawyer, tells the paper.
david egilman
You need to add several key words. Coercion (read Gramsci) & corruption & crime
Andrew
Only in Canada, instead of applying for Old Age Pension, you should rather apply for the Status of Refugee. The federal Government of Canada allows a monthly pension of $1,890.00 to a simple refugee plus $580.00 in social aid = a grand total of $2,470.00 monthly X 12 months = $28,920.00 annual income? By comparison, the Old Age Pension of a senior citizen who has contributed to the development of Our Beautiful Big Country during 40 or 50 years, CANNOT receive more than amount/month $1,012.00 in Old Age Pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement X 12 months = $12,144.00 annual income a difference of $16,776.00per year * Perhaps our senior citizens should ask for the Status of Refugees instead of applying for Old Age Pension.
Disability Pension for sick/suffering Canadians is only $ 874.00 a month!
SCANDAL, DISCRIMINATION, CRIME!!!!
Andrew
Apotex is taking advantage of a sick and impaired individual, not able to effectively / aggressively defend himself in articulated manner due to medical condition (compromised speech mechanism and other neurological problems).
Because of this circumstance my issue/problem become politically sensitive and concluding it in lawful manner is in the best interest of General Public.
Trough most of my 34 (thirty four ) years of professional work I did everything in my capacity to bring relief to people whose lives were destroyed by health problems and they were send on the path of suffer and despair.
For years I worked in the Children’s Hospital where I was named Employee of the year in recognition for my exceptional work.
For many, many years I worked in pharmaceutical industry doing everything to contribute to the variety and quality of products available on the market to those in need.
I was recognized many times all over again for my dedication, compassion, performance and leadership (proof upon request) and then hear in Ontario my world collapsed.
I become victim of criminal activities within industry I SERVED FOR SO MANY YEARS.
Pharmaceutical Corporation with its mandate to bring relief to all who suffer, disregarded safety and for almost 7 years exposed me with out any personal protection to very potent products.
When I raised (in open manner) concern for safety of equipment, contamination of personnel and quality of the products I was given Warning Letter- reason “escalates issues to upper level”.
At the same time as many other employees I was getting very sick.
As result of Torpharm/Apotex’s negligence (exposure to advanced structural composite materials /chemicals used in the manufacturing processes which have been classified as to have a co- carcinogenic and/or synergistic effect) I AM DISABLE.
Toxic build up of the drugs and/or its metabolites can be fatal.
I AM ON MULTIPLE MEDICATIONS BEING AFRAID OF UNCERTAIN TOMMOROW.
As we know, all Corporations are required to adhere to certain standards of behaviour.
These standards are design to protect them and others.
Failure to meet these standards can cause unnecessary personal injury and is punishable by law.
TorPharm/Apotex had the legal obligation to behave in a particular manner and had the duty to protect me from on the job harm and personal injury.
The Corporation failed to fulfill this obligation by acting inappropriately and due to legal breech of conduct caused my personal injury.
Company got engaged in intentional malicious conduct violating all statutes with a reckless indifference.
It acted in the face of a perceived risk that its actions will violate all laws.
Company treated me in harsh and humiliating way acting in an especially egregious manner. The evidence proves that alleged facts were true.
Company, with its mandate to bring relief / help to people suffering from many medical conditions did make me disable ( work related medical conditions) limiting my professional and personal life, making challenging my social life and in vicious / malicious manner on on going bases is preventing me from enjoying my Constitutional Right to be able to provide for myself.
System is cooperating with Criminal Corporation instead of focusing on Criminal Corporation which in horrible manner impacts all sick people.Company, with its mandate to bring relief / help to people suffering from many medical conditions did make me disable ( work related medical conditions) limiting my professional and personal life, making challenging my social life and in vicious / malicious manner on on going bases is preventing me from enjoying my Constitutional Right to be able to provide for myself.
I was and am tortured by Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office, Service Canada, Office of the Worker Adviser, Ontario Human Rights Commission, and some more Agencies.Canadian Government institutions mandated to assist General Public in time of misfortune, suffer and despair selected to engage in criminal activities and assist criminal Corporation which is stone waling an Ontarian / victim with life threatening medical conditions. Those Institutions deprived me from Constitutional and Law protection. Apotex and its accomplices denied me medical help, deprived me of all means of sustaining myself and are not regretful. Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office sentenced me and my family for life of suffer, despair, hunger and poverty. Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office shattered my and my family’s dreams and future. Apotex many times derailed my attempts to get help and justice. Apotex’s philosophy was “to antagonize every one against every one” to keep employees week, fragmented, unorganized, not able to question any thing ( safety / luck of protection), absence of Safety Data Shits, production of unknown products, not calibrated / invalidated equipment and systems, adverse product side effects, prevent employees from complaints to Authorities etc.
Apotex did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Ontario Labor Board, WSiB (Workers Compensation Insurance Board), Ontario Human Rights Commission, Ontario Health Act , Ontario Labor Law as well obstructed Canadian Constitution etc.
Apotex committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury , criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did cause permanent disability, irreparable damage,
Ontario Labor Board, WSiB (Workers Compensation Insurance Board), Ontario Ombudsmen’s Office, OHRC got engaged in criminal conspiracy with Apotex sabotaging my case , terrorizing me with constant scare tactics that if I will inquire about my Claim they will dismiss it in no time.
In all those Institutions people in position of decision making patronized mi, terrorized mi , made laughs during my testimonies about my suffer etc.!
Labor Board, Ombudsmen Office and WSiB refused to report crimes against me and General Public (attempted murder) to Authorities/Police.
I believe that drugs produced during some periods of my employment killed more people world wide then military operations in Iraq, Afghanistan combined. (Approximately 3 weeks after ingesting the generic version of the drug, Lois Ann Colacicco committed suicide). What about millions of very sick people in 115 Countries taking Apotex’s products?
Why Government Agencies provided cover up for Apotex’s criminal activities for so many years until big problems were recently spontaneously discovered by Investigators Debra M. Emerson and Rochelle L. Campbell. (Richard L. Friedman,Director ,Division of Manufacturing and Product Quality Office of Compliance
Center for Drug Evaluation and Research
Department of Health and Human Services
Public Health Service
Food and Drug Administration
Silver Spring, MD 20993 )
Andrew
AT THE PRESENT, DUE TO LAW /REGULATIONS WHOLE CONCEPT OF GENERIC PHARMACEUTICALS IS CRIMINAL IN ITS NATURE. Apotex employs only people willing to cut corners.That is the nature of the generics. In order to bit the system you must commit crimes. Honest people are not welcome at Apotex. You must do what Company asks you to do!
For many years Company melted and boiled chemicals in hundred of pounds at the time in order to challenge existing /valid Patents of Brand Name’s by process ( Cyclosporin- Cyclosporine is a potent immunosuppressant used originally to prevent the rejection of transplanted kidneys, continues to be recommended for a variety of organ transplants, brain function controlling drugs (psychiatric), antidepressants and narcotics which I worked with: PAXIL, Lavitra, Plavix, Bupropion, Gabapentin, Gemfibrosil, Metformin, Omeprazole, Temazepam/Etodolac, Metroprolol , Norvasc, Depakote and other brain function controlling drugs and antidepressants, narcotics blood composition and pressure controlling drugs etc.).
As result of Company’s negligence (exposure to advanced structural composite materials /chemicals used in the manufacturing processes which have been classified as to have a co- carcinogenic and/or synergistic effect -Depakote/ Divalproex Sodium, Diazepam, Clonazepam, Carbamazepine, Phenobarbital, Clozapine, Lorazepam, Phenobarbital, Amoxapine, Bupropion, Clozapine, Lorazepam, Amoxapine, Paroxatine, Fluoxetine, Temazepam, Gabapentin, Depakote,Cyclosporine etc. ) I am disabled!
Company was preventing creation of any medical records related to employee’s side effects associated with products exposure.
Approximately 3 weeks after ingesting the generic version of the drug, Lois Ann Colacicco committed suicide. Decedent had ingested Apotex’s generic equivalent of Paxil. Soon after, she began taking the generic version of the drug, paroxetine hydrochloride, which is a bio-equivalent of Paxil and manufactured by Apotex Lois Colacicco committed suicide in her home . Often tablets have too much of active ingredient or do not have at all.
Adverse reactions are most likely to occur when starting or discontinuing the drug, increasing or lowering the dose or when switching from one SSRI to another. Adverse reactions are often diagnosed as bipolar disorder when the symptoms may be entirely iatrogenic (treatment induced). Withdrawal, especially abrupt withdrawal, from any of these medications can cause severe neuropsychiatric and physical symptoms. It is important to withdraw extremely slowly from these drugs, often over a period of a year or more, under the supervision of a qualified and experienced specialist, if available. Company adicted me to many dangerous actives by unprotected exposure and discarded me while I become very sick and prevented me from obtaining any help!
There are cases of bizarre behavior, school shootings/incidents, road rage tragedies, air rage incidents, postpartum depression cases, MANY murders (homicides/ murder-suicides) and other acts of violence including workplace violence.
There is a grave concern among advocates that adverse reactions are greatly underestimated by the public, the medical profession, and the regulatory authorities. Each of these stories can be interpreted as an adverse reaction and in most cases evidence of bizarre behavioral change consistent with drug reaction. In some stories causation is acknowledged and the juxtaposition of these stories with those where it goes unrecognized as well as the repetition of themes and circumstances is chilling. If indeed medications played a significant role in all these tragedies, then this is a public health problem of epidemic proportions on a global scale.
All patients being treated with antidepressants for any indication should be monitored appropriately and observed closely for clinical worsening, suicidality, and unusual changes in behavior, especially during the initial few months of a course of drug therapy, or at times of dose changes, either increases or decreases.Patients, their families, and their caregivers should be encouraged to be alert to the emergence of anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, mania, other unusual changes in behavior, worsening of depression, and suicidal ideation, especially early during antidepressant treatment and when the dose is adjusted up or down. Families and caregivers of patients should be advised to look for the emergence of such symptoms on a day-to-day basis, since changes may be abrupt. Such symptoms should be reported to the patient’s prescriber or health professional, especially if they are severe, abrupt in onset, or were not part of the patient’s presenting symptoms. Symptoms such as these may be associated with an increased risk for suicidal thinking and behavior and indicate a need for very close monitoring and possibly changes in the medication. Antidepressants have been recognized as potential inducers of mania and psychosis since their introduction in the 1950s. Described psychosis as an adverse effect of the older tricyclic antidepressant imipramine. Since the introduction of Prozac in December, 1987, there has been a massive increase in the number of people taking antidepressants. Over 200,000 people a year enter a hospital with antidepressant-associated mania and/or psychosis. The subsequent harm from this prescribing can be seen .
Nature
This amendment has been the center of controversy in recent years in the areas of free speech and religion. Nature
Andrew
DECIVED, ABONDONED, SUFFERING AND WITH OUT CONSTITUTIONAL AND LAW PROTECTION IN CANADA!
The issue/problem becomes politically sensitive and concluding it in lawful manner is in the best interest of General Public.
I would like to know, whether Ontario become safe haven for big Corporations engaged in criminal activities?
How this happened, that private Corporation controls Lawyers, Doctors, Government Agencies etc.?
Company, with its mandate to bring relief / help to people suffering from many medical conditions did make me disable ( work related medical conditions) limiting my professional and personal life, making challenging my social life and in vicious / malicious manner on on going bases is preventing me from enjoying my Constitutional Right to be able to provide for myself.
System is cooperating with Criminal Corporation instead of focusing on Criminal Corporation which in horrible manner impacts all sick people. Company, with its mandate to bring relief / help to people suffering from many medical conditions did make me disable ( work related medical conditions) limiting my professional and personal life, making challenging my social life and in vicious / malicious manner on on going bases is preventing me from enjoying my Constitutional Right to be able to provide for myself.
I was and am tortured by Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office, Service Canada, Office of the Worker Adviser, Ontario Human Rights Commission, and some more Agencies. Canadian Government institutions mandated to assist General Public in time of misfortune, suffer and despair selected to engage in criminal activities and assist criminal Corporation which is stone waling an Ontarian / victim with life threatening medical conditions. Those Institutions deprived me from Constitutional and Law protection. Apotex and its accomplices denied me medical help, deprived me of all means of sustaining myself and are not regretful. Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office sentenced me and my family for life of suffer, despair, hunger and poverty. Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office shattered my and my family’s dreams and future. Apotex many times derailed my attempts to get help and justice.
IS THERE ANY ONE WILLING TO LITIGATE M MY CASE AGAINST APOTEX AND GOVERNAMENT OF ONTARIO?
IF SO, PLEASE INDICATE ON THE FORUM AND I WILL CONTACT YOU.
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE.
Andrew
I am suffering a great deal with life threatening medical conditions not able to afford groceries, needed medications nor to pay any of my financial dues.
*The extraordinarily lucrative pharmaceutical industry has long been driven more by profit, power and policy then pills or concern to Health and Safety.
There is much moral posturing in an industry that is only too well aware, that it capitalizes on a captive market of the desperate and the afflicted.
*It is important to differentiate in between an accident and a crime (criminal, methodical negligence). Torpharm/Apotex got engaged in intentional malicious conduct violating all statutes with a reckless indifference.
They deliberately acted with knowledge of a high degree of probability of serious harm to me and reckless indifference to the consequences of that act.
It acted in the face of a perceived risk that its actions will violate all laws.
We are faced with unethical corporation that engaged in illegal production of prohibited products, violated all rules of the corporate system and in the process sacrificed health of own employees.
We did have on daily bases incidents/accidents and substantial product spills.
In manufacturing area we were encapsulating / compressing very many products on daily bases (spontaneously /parallel).
On each piece of equipment/system we were running different product.
On regular bases particular machine was changed over to different product/ format in the same day.
Maintenance Technicians/Mechanics were not limited (as stated by Company’s witness) to service only outside of machines, but for most of cases inside of machines and in particular in process compartments where tooling was installed and product discharged.
On/in all cases of any equipment failure or problem with quality of the product (hardness, thickness, contamination etc.) was followed with direct and prolonged Technician’s/Mechanic’s unprotected exposure.
On regular bases Technician/Mechanic had to spend hours at the time running and tuning machines to the proper speck due to fact that hired Operators did not have any prior pharmaceutical/mechanical experience and could not correct the problems (even minor ) on their own. On regular bases Operators did run away if the failure /spill occurred.
Due to introduction of dangerous products all employees in Quality Dept, all in Sanitation Dept, all in Manufacturing Dept., all in Maintenance Dept. and so on left the Company and Company was not able to recruit qualified candidates. This situation created total collapse of compliance with any and all of GMP, SOP Safety regulations.
To great extend, absence of qualified /responsible Personnel, Company’s big financial problems (expansion, Legal liabilities, pending processing of approvals of new products) exhausted/collapsed Company’s financial fluidity and prevented Company from supply of base items (toilet paper, gloves, eye protection, protective uniforms, masks, you name it, etc.)
Because of total chaos in all areas and non compliance, Company instated in positions (key positions like safety) individuals not qualified /not willing to voice any constructive opinions.
As result of Torpharm/Apotex’s negligence (exposure to advanced structural composite materials /chemicals used in the manufacturing processes which have been classified as to have a co- carcinogenic and/or synergistic effect) I AM DISABLE. For many years Company melted and boiled chemicals in hundred of pounds at the time in order to challenge existing /valid Patents of Brand Name’s by process ( Cyclosporin- Cyclosporine is a potent immunosuppressant used originally to prevent the rejection of transplanted kidneys, continues to be recommended for a variety of organ transplants, brain function controlling drugs (psychiatric), antidepressants and narcotics which I worked with: PAXIL, Lavitra, Plavix, Bupropion, Gabapentin, Gemfibrosil, Metformin, Omeprazole, Temazepam/Etodolac, Metroprolol , Norvasc, Depakote and other brain function controlling drugs and antidepressants, narcotics blood composition and pressure controlling drugs etc.).
Those processes were conducted in /on not approved equipment and in manufacturing area not approved for such operations.
Also I got massive and unprotected exposure to unidentified product (s ) in / during out of control accident (we did have many accidents) when one of not approved new products proved to be volatile and during process exploded causing inferno, burning/baking for period of time while releasing toxic fumes and causing collateral damage to equipment and infrastructure.
BEYOND ANY DOUBT I WAS EXPOSED TO THE DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES WITH OUT ANY PROTECTION AND THAT THEY CAUSED THE ADVERSE EFFECTS AND INJURIES I NOW SUFFER (Documented).
As result of Company’s negligence (exposure to advanced structural composite materials /chemicals used in the manufacturing processes which have been classified as to have a co- carcinogenic and/or synergistic effect -Depakote/ Divalproex Sodium, Diazepam, Clonazepam, Carbamazepine, Phenobarbital, Clozapine, Lorazepam, Phenobarbital, Amoxapine, Bupropion, Clozapine, Lorazepam, Amoxapine, Paroxatine, Fluoxetine, Temazepam, Gabapentin, Depakote,Cyclosporine etc. ) I am suffering skin discoloration, sinuses and respiratory ailments (fluid in upper lungs). I am suffering from severe hypertension (which at the present is out of control - BP 235/135) and due to it as well as chemicals effect my hearth was damaged, migraine headaches, joints and back pains, nervous system effects (state of mental turmoil, compromised motor skills, compromised speech mechanism, memory elapses etc.), vision problems (constant presence of a black spot in eyes which may indicate minor stroke effect/hemorrhage or Depakote’s side effects etc.) my heir turned white under psychiatric drugs, kidney pain and changes, enhanced risk of cancer, and fear of cancer.
I experience a feeling of general discomfort and sickness; weakness, trouble breathing, unusual drowsiness, dizziness or light-headedness; unusual / unexplained stomach upsets, the sudden development of a slow or irregular heartbeat.
I have serious concerns about the safety of the levels of exposure. My worry is that a toxic build up of the drugs and/or its metabolites can be fatal. Some of the side effects I experience include infections, nausea, dry mouth, constipation, decreased appetite, sleepiness, dizziness, sexual side effects, nervousness, tremor, yawning, sweating, abnormal vision, weakness, insomnia, including electric shock sensations, abnormal dreams, agitation, anxiety, nausea, mood fluctuations, headache, fatigue, sleep disturbances, skin rash, anorexia, leg pain , joint pain , muscle pain, pain in arms and legs, abdominal cramps, body chronic pain, medication taste, sore throat, also effects include vomiting, rash, flu-like symptoms.
I am suffering a great deal with life threatening medical conditions not able to afford groceries, needed medications nor to pay any of my financial dues. I am not able to perform any chores around my residence, forced to relay on assistance. I was “swimming in” / a massive exposure with out any protection to a potent immunosuppressant used for organ transplants, brain function controlling drugs (psychiatric), antidepressants and narcotics which overwhelmed my system.
Toxic build up of the drugs and/or its metabolites can be fatal.
I AM ON MULTIPLE MEDICATIONS BEING AFRAID OF UNCERTAIN TOMMOROW.
The evidence proves that alleged facts were true.
Company, with its mandate to bring relief / help to people suffering from many medical conditions did make me disable ( work related medical conditions) limiting my professional and personal life, making challenging my social life, destroyed my marriage, imposed extreme hardship on my family and relatives/friends, indirectly killed two of my elderly parents (since they learned about my situation they suddenly died few weeks a part - I was sole provider) and in vicious / malicious manner on on going bases is preventing me from enjoying my Constitutional Right to be able to provide for myself.
Some Doctors are vigorously complaining about my non compliance in treatment, but they failed to acknowledge , that despite my cautioning about my saturation with chemicals and need on their behalf to be very selective with prescribing any treatments , they treated me with array of drugs for a illusionary condition which I did not have . I underwent number of tests (amongst in Nuclear Physics Lab) which conformed that I do not have any tumors.
Many Doctor’s statements are ridiculing and consciously ignoring fact , that my medical conditions are directly related to prolonged and unprotected exposure to drugs at work ( 6.5 years). Despite my repeated attempts to focus Doctors attention on the real source of my problems, most Doctors refused to talk about work connection with my conditions.
It was clinically proven, that such potent and unpredictable in effect drugs like Bupropion, Tramadol Hydrochloride (Serious potential consequences of over dosage with tramadol hydrochloride tablets are central nervous system depression, respiratory depression and death), Cyclosporine (a potent immunosuppressant), PAXIL (crystalline paroxetine hydrochloride hemihydrate) and many more in fact do cost all medical conditions I do suffer right now.
The human nervous system is particularly vulnerable to toxic-chemical insults. Many chemicals can permanently disrupt nervous system function.
Do cause emergence of anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, aggressiveness, impulsivity, akathisia (psychomotor restlessness), hypomania, mania, other unusual changes in behavior, worsening of depression, and suicidal ideation, especially early during antidepressant treatment and when the dose is adjusted up or down. Families and caregivers of patients should be advised to look for the emergence of such symptoms on a day-to-day basis, since changes may be abrupt. Symptoms such as these may be associated with an increased risk for suicidal thinking and behavior. There has been a long-standing concern, that antidepressants may have a role in inducing worsening of depression and the emergence of suicidality in certain patients during the early phases of treatment.
Withdrawal can often be more dangerous than continuing on a medication. It is important to withdraw extremely slowly from these drugs, usually over a period of a year or more, under the supervision of a qualified specialist. Antidepressants have been recognized as potential inducers of mania and psychosis. Is reported that over 200,000 people a year enter a hospital with antidepressant-associated mania and/or psychosis.
Adverse reactions are most likely to occur when starting or discontinuing the drug, increasing or lowering the dose or when switching from one SSRI to another. Adverse reactions are often diagnosed as bipolar disorder when the symptoms may be entirely iatrogenic (treatment induced). Withdrawal, especially abrupt withdrawal, from any of these medications can cause severe neuropsychiatric and physical symptoms (which do have bearing on cardiovascular system and many more). I was addicted to many of those drugs and abruptly withdrawn by Company. FDA published a Public Health Advisory that reiterates several of these side effects and states (in part) “Anxiety, agitation, panic attacks, insomnia, irritability, hostility, impulsivity, akathisia (severe restlessness), hypomania, and mania have been reported in adult and pediatric patients being treated with antidepressants for major depressive disorder as well as for other indications, both psychiatric and non-psychiatric.” PAXIL interacts with other Inhibitors. Paroxetine will elevate plasma levels of thioridazine etc.
Use of / exposure to antipsychotic drugs and IV drug abuse of MPTP which inhibits the function of mitochondria within the nerve cells of the brain, Environmental toxins may play a role in Parkinson’s disease. Exposure to psychiatric / antidepressants drugs may potentially cause symptoms of Parkinson’s Disease.
Adverse reactions to psychiatric / antidepressant medications (treatment induced) are often diagnosed as bipolar disorder when the symptoms may be entirely iatrogenic (treatment induced).
Antidepressant induced violence / suicide at work is documented.
In my case many Doctors are taking advantage of a sick and impaired individual, not able to effectively / aggressively defend himself in articulated manner due to medical condition (compromised speech mechanism and other neurological problems).
Many Doctors are DESPERATELY TRYING TO ATTRIBUTE MY COMPLEX WORK RELATED MEDICAL CONDITIONS TO ANY AND ALL MEDICAL CONDITIONS IN MY ENTIRE LIFE IN ORDER TO GET AN EXCUSE TO UNDERMINE MY CLAIM.
Apotex falsified all records provided by them to WSiB and engaged its employees in criminal conspiracy (documented).
Which untimely further deteriorates my state of health.
Many individuals involved in my Case purposely are omitting very critical evidence and medical conditions (or are reducing it in to insignificance).
Please focus on 7 years of my unprotected work with toxic / controlled substances/narcotics , which are known to cause my conditions even in dosages regularly prescribed by Doctors and much more/worse if over dosed.
Please start to question harmful molecules which Company processed not reviling nature /name of them and keeping in confidentiality Work Orders and Safety Data Sheets as well not providing any protection for employees.
Apotex did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Ontario Labor Board, WSiB (Workers Compensation Insurance Board), Ontario Human Rights Commission, Ontario Health Act, Ontario Labor Law as well obstructed Canadian Constitution etc.
Apotex committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury, criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did cause permanent disability, irreparable damage.
Company terrorized by many means any one / other employees voicing concerns about issues with Safety and quality of the products.
Best Regards,
Andrew
“To all injured workers:
First of all the Meredith principle states that all moneys are to be paid out of the fund this includes the wages of the Board members and case workers adjudicators. Can you imagine our surprise? When we found out that the tax payer is really footing the bill this has been written in the Toronto star and several other publications and admitted to by a Toronto MP.
This tells us that the Government has broken the Meredith agreement and they cannot claim to be arms length away from the Workers Compensation boards any longer because they are direct stakeholders in it and have been committing fraud against the very public that pays the bills in reality they have made the public stakeholders in these boards as well.
Our relatives, the ones that are paying taxes are paying these caseworkers and adjudicators to torment and abuse injured workers.
And the employers that are paying into the fund are really getting ripped off because they are paying the bill twice because they all pay personal income taxes plus business taxes and they have to pay into the fund in order to do business.
But the real sad fact is we need to get our acts together and fight these people with every trick in the book. We have to sign petitions organize protest get t-shirts made up like Mike Beauchamp did dammed good idea. Whining and snivelling does no good I know your in pain and your life has been screwed up so has mine people have to get past the dark thoughts and focus on the light and that light is either reforming or destroying the WCB.
I have a petition to get rid of the privative clauses out of the Workers’ Compensation Acts’. The section of the act called (Jurisdiction Of The Board) now you may think what good will that do but as it now stands even if you take your case to the Supreme the only thing they can do is send it back to the WCB to look at it again but if we get rid of this clause where they are protected by a Provincial Act of the legislature then we have a chance.
I will be taking this petition not to the government because we know that they will ignore it but to the United Nations if we can embarrass these people on the world stage then maybe we will be able to force them to make a change.
This is my petition link ”
http://www.gopetition.com/online/29449.html
Andrew
I want to reassure publishers and viewers that all information / allegations included in my chapters are true.
I am not suffering from any delusional disorder / paranoid disorder as Company, some Government Agencies and some Doctors like to suggest. I never had any family history of psychiatric, cardiovascular nor any other medical problems. Under Company’s influence I was and am treated for illusionary conditions which I do not have. Doctors forced me to under go hearth, kidneys, eye surgeries etc. to deal on interim bases with my health issues, totally ignoring the source / triggering mechanisms for the problems. (I did not obey).
All my info is backed up by evidence and collaborated by witnesses.
Due to fact, that many of the products I worked with are psychiatric / antidepressants, narcotics etc., time ago I went to a psychiatrist to inquire in more collaborated way about side effects of such medications and possible duration of such side effects. Many chemicals can permanently disrupt nervous system function. Adverse reactions are often diagnosed as bipolar disorder when the symptoms are entirely iatrogenic (treatment / exposure induced).
Psychiatrist issued a statement conforming, that I am not a “nut”/ “mental case” and that I am stating the truths.
Time ago Company posted internal Memo for employees stating, that Dr. Olivieri (“The dispute began after researcher Dr Nancy Olivieri decided to break a confidentiality agreement with Apotex, a Toronto based pharmaceutical company that was sponsoring her research. She published results critical of the drug deferiprone, which she was testing in young patients with thalassaemia, in the New England Journal of Medicine (1998;339:417-23).
Dr Olivieri, former head of the hospital’s haemoglobinopathy programme, was threatened with legal action by Apotex and also removed from her hospital post, though she was later reinstated (BMJ 1999;318:351) “ is a “mental case “.She was brave enough to revile dangerous side effects of the product she conducted Clinical Trials on, then I suppose am in good company of deformed / slandered by Company individuals.
Only after Dr.Olivieri lost her Case in European Court and product was approved for General Public, then only after that Company admitted that we worked on this product for many years. (with out neither employees knowledge nor personal protection).
Andrew
Please note, that during years of my communication with variety of Government Agencies I did spend a lot of money ( which I had to borrow) on office supply , postage and miscellaneous items associated with my case.
My Application to Tribunal ALONE required almost 3000 pages of printed / copied material, plus binders and Registered postage etc.( RESPONDENTS’ - a few pages at the time).
After years of investigation Ministry of Labor, Ontario Ombudsmen etc. did not have any documents in my File , accept what I did submit!
With assistance of Government Agencies, Apotex managed to turn tables around and against Criminal Code , Occupational Health and SafetyAct obligated me ( a victim ) to produce / provide all information / evidence , swamping me with administrative tasks and huge challenges, redirecting my non existent resources to challenge dysfunctional System.
All Government Agencies including Tribunal did not assist me in any of my efforts to get situation in order and in compliance with CANADIAN JUSTICE SYSTEM.
Contrarily, many Agencies engaged in criminal activities.
Apotex must be proud of their cooperative / criminal performance.
That was one of the Apotex’s and Agential Accomplice’s tactic - to destroy me economically and deteriorate my health to the point of fatality.
So far, also Tribunal did not help me with financial assistance and guidance to REASSURE SUCCESS OF MY CASE ( against Tribunal’s mandate ).
Any , even very minor administrative deviation on my behalf did and does trigger stagnation of proceedings and excuse to impose artificial barriers on my path to justice.
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES SUPPOSE TO COUCHED ME, NOT TO BASHED ME .
DELAYS IN RESOLVING OF MY CASE RAPIDLY DETERIORATE APOTEX’S SITUATION and credibility of Ontario’s System/Governament.
My story, Dr.Olivieri’s and few other stories are perfect material for a horror Hollywood movie.
Wonder, if that will see Theater’s screens?
My story all ready generated a lot of interest in Europe and USA despite fact, that I am keeping all evidence secret.
With time, (Class Action, FBI etc.) I may get Court Order to testify.
Andrew
Only in two years Apotex rejected 554 batches of product manufactured in facility in Ontario, Canada! (that’s where I worked).
Some of the rejected lots were shipped to USA.
There IS 554 rejected IDENTIFIED SO FAR.
NO RECORD OF CONTROLLED DESTRUCTION / RECICLING. (FDA –“However, your firm did not provide records of investigations for these batch failures.” This is regarding a December 10 -19, 2008 inspection of your drug product manufacturing facility in Etobicoke, Ontario, Canada by Investigators Debra M. Emerson and Rochelle L. Campbell. The inspection revealed significant deviations from U.S. current good manufacturing practice (CGMP) regulations (Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 210 and 211) in the manufacture of non-sterile oral solid dosage drug products. The CGMP deviations were listed on an Inspectional Observations (FDA-483) form issued to Ms. Carol M. Austin, Associate Director of Compliance, at the close of the inspection).
I AM CONFIDENT, THAT THOSE BATCHES WERE SOLD TO USA, AFRICA, ASIA, SOUTH AMERICA ETC.
There has also been a wider recall of 40 products in the US and some drugs have been withdrawn from the Australian market. Furthermore, Medsafe, the New Zealand regulatory agency, has joined the US in issuing a temporary import ban.
Documents / NOTES can not be lost / misplaced or “not maintained” in the pharmaceutical Company / Industry unless you do not generate any or purposely lose them. What about “good documentation practices”?
Policy mandatory in the Industry!!!!!?
Oh, right, Apotex has the Policy only for Authorities and to use it as a tool for propaganda.
Well, contrarily to Apotex I did observe the Policy in order to assist my ex- employer in achieving its vision / goals. Unfortunately, despite fact, that I utilized the Policy of “Good Documentation Practices” in good faith / into Company’s benefit, the Company punished me for it…
Company was #1 only because no one was checking any thing. No mechanisms in force to control SELF REGULATING PHARMACY!
For years sick people are turning 6′ under the ground due to contaminated medications!
Andrew
To Registrar – Transition
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
Nov. 18/2009
Re: Alleged preliminary issues (Apotex / Counsel’s Letter dated November 17 /2009).
Dear Madam,
It is submitted , that in the Letter dated Nov 17 / 2009 Apotex / Counsel ignores all evidence / submissions and in its criminally twisted methodology attempts to reiterate fabricated information and alter Tribunal’s /Commission’s Judicial Process.
It is submitted, that Release Document was extorted.
• Forwarded by Counsel / Apotex request that this Application be dismissed on alleged preliminary bases is outrageous.
• In accordance with Human Rights Code no one ever can sign away ones own HUMAN RIGHTS on any circumstance (any conditions )-period. ( )
• Release Document Apotex invalidated by its own actions (it is not binding / legal due to reasons listed in previous communications).
• IT IS EXTREMELLY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT IN APENDIX “ A “ IN APOTEX’S RESPONSE TO MY APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 50 OF THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT BEFORE THE ONTARIO LABOUR RELATIONS BOARD (AS WELL AS BEFORE WSiB, HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, TRIBUNAL AND OTHER GOVERNAMENT AGENCIES) APOTEX /COUNSEL INCLUDES IN POINT 1 OF THE RESPOND “APOTEX / EMPLOYER DENIES EACH AND EVERY ALLEGATION (“OUTRAGEOUS ALLEGATIONS”) OF MISCONDUCT CONTAINED IN THE COMPLAINT AND PUTS THE COMPLEINANT TO THE STRICT PROOF THEREOF. THE EMPLOYER ALSO SUBMITS THAT THE COMPLEINT IS COMPLETELY WITH OUT MERIT AND OUT TO BE DISMISSED WITH OUT A HEARING FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.”
• IT IS SUBMITED THAT APOTEX’S CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR IS EXTREME SO FORTH IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT AFTER SO MANY YEARS OF RETRIBUTION, DISCRIMINATION, HERRASEMENT, DENAIL OF MEDICAL HELP APOTEX /COUNSEL ADMITS ALL MY ALLEGATIONS (RESPONSE ON ALLEGED PRELIMINARY ISSUES, PAGE 3, OCT 22/2009 UNDER “JURISDICTION” ( ), BUT THIS TIME AROUND CLAIMING THAT THE ALLEGATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS CODE.
• TROUGH OUT ALMOST 6 YEARS IN ALL RESPONSES TO ALL GOVERNAMENT AGENCIES APOTEX / COUNSEL CLAIMED THAT PARTICULAR ALLEGATIONS ARE NOT VIOLATIONS OF PARTICULAR AGENCY’S REGULATIONS.
• BASED ON HRONOLOGY OF EVENTS AND THE CONTENT OF APOTEX’S STATEMENTS ONE CAN CONCLUDE THAT IF MY CASE WOULD GO TO SUPREME COURT OR PUBLIC’S INQUIRY, FBI etc., THEN APOTEX WOULD STATE THAT IN FACT I WAS HERRASED, DISCRIMINATED, SUBJECTED TO RETRIBUTION etc. BUT THESE FACTS/ ACTS ARE NOT JURISDICTOION / MANDATE OF THOSE INSTITUTIONS.
• DUE TO APOTEX’S TORTURE, RETRIBUTION, DISCRIMINATION, HERRASEMENT DURRING MY EMPLOYMENT AND AFTER AND DENAIL OF MEDICAL HELP I SUSTAINED INJURIES AT WORK AND PERMANENT DISABILITIES SUFFERING A GREAT DEAL!
SIGNED RELEASE
- MY SIGNATURE UNDER “Release Document” was obtained as result of intimidation, pressure and by other not legal tactics / means (psychological / financial duress – both of my parents died few weeks earlier after they learned about my medical conditions as well as I was incapacitated /very sick).
- Apotex DRUGGED me up and DECEIVED.
I was under influence of psychiatric / antidepressants and narcotics at the time of occurrence and after with severely compromised speech mechanism and other neurological problems.
- I was coerced / fooled in to signing a Termination Agreement.
- Apotex subjected me to disabling and deadly withdrawal effects associated with products.
- Company abused my condition and committed crime against me.
- I was profoundly sick at the time of occurrence and after.
- I did not understand the terms and conditions of the Release Document.
- Apotex heavily incapacitated me and as result of it I was not in position to obtain any independent legal advice. (Apotex sabotaged all my attempts to obtain any legal advice/ support - documented).
- Based on chronology, nature of events and the content of the Release Document it is easy to conclude Apotex’s motive.
It is submitted , that Record of Employment was not presented to me at the time of criminal act of Termination but three (3 ) weeks after (it was mailed to me). The letter “M” on it was pointed out by Apotex’s Office Clerk processing my RRSP contributions and consequently discovered by my friends / family. I was still heavily incapacitated at that time.
The Release was every thing but just / fair as Respondent cleims. The “reasonable “severance was even not compliant with Employment Standards Act (completely without consideration for human rights breach).
In original Section 50 Occupational Health and Safety Application I was told by Labour Board what I should indicate in it.
As events proved, Board acted under Apotex/ Counsel’s criminal influence.
It is submitted, that such terminology (intimidation, duress etc.) was as well mentioned (defined ) in WSiB’s Application / Investigation. This time around it was not purged from my File.
The letter “M” on Record of Employment WAS ONE OF MANY FACTORS WHICH ADDITIONALLY INVALIDATED ALREADY INVALID / CRIMINAL RELEASE DOCUMENT. DECEIVE / ABANDONMENT WAS THE NEXT OF MANY FACTORS INDICATEING CRIMINAL MOTIVES AND BEHAVIOURS ON BEHALF OF APOTEX.
While incapacitated and very sick I signed a typical, broadly-worded release – the kind that attempts to bar any future actions from being brought, including complaints not yet filed or even contemplated. The Commission has approved at its meeting in March of 2006, and now published its Guide to Releases in Human Rights Complaints. This comprehensive guide should be guidance in assessing Apotex’s bad faith.
If I failed to indicate / quote any particular term (intimidated etc.) that does not mean that such term does not apply.
It does mean that I could not list all terms from the vocabulary / dictionary which do apply in to my circumstance due to adversary actions on behalf of Apotex and due to my medical condition.
It is submitted , that Apotex / Counsel should refrain from making any frivolous, vexatious , trivial , made in bad faith suggestions such as “ if the Applicant was intimidated , drugged, deceived into signing a Release it would have been front and centre in his Section 50 Application and the original Human Rights Complaint”. (bottom of the front page and top of the second page in the Letter dated Nov 17 / 2009).
It submitted, that respondent’s submissions concerning my Application contain ad hoc rationalizations to avoid finding out, that its activities are criminal and Respondent should be declared as the one committing crimes against humanity, committing acts of domestic and Global terrorism and should be investigated by Amnesty International, FBI, Ministry of Public Safety and trialed by Tribunal in Strasburg for such crimes. ( 554 Lots rejected in two years! No record where that stuff went! WHY? SOLD?!!!!!!!!
IN ONTARIO PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY IS COMMITTING CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY!!!!!)
Respondent should be declared an enemy within/ Publics enemy.
I believe that appropriate actions will be taken be Commission and a Tribunal.
It is submitted, that under pressure of such serious allegations (admited by Company’s Manager, witnesses and Respondent/ Counsel)Respondent will argue, that “a day is a night” and will invent its own definitions of terms to suit its own purpose as it did trough out legal processing of Dr. Olivieri’s Case (we have many examples documented by Authorities). Trivialized by Counsel “his own wording” was a recollection of facts by sick/ disabled/ suffering person couched by Government Agencies.
Extreme Delay
All my actions do constitute “good faith”.
It is submitted that there was not any delay (extreme?!) at all.
- I did not have any one knowledge in administrating of my Case and represent me ( no Union and I am profoundly sick / disable)’
- I was under influence / heavily impaired on psychiatric / antidepressants, narcotics and other potent medications before, during and after occurrence. Company in acts of retribution and criminal negligence exposed me to highly potent / dangerous toxic substances for 6.5 years period with out any Personal Protection Equipment.
- I was profoundly sick at the time of occurrence and after (I could not talk, hold a pan, walk, rationalize what was happening.
- Company abused my condition and committed crimes against me.
- Company deceived me with promises of a new job with out exposure to toxic substances at the time of occurrence and after.
- Apotex repeatedly stagnated and dragged in time (discovery process”) my Case. I was misguided in the process.
It is submitted that I did not failed to provide any evidence for a rationale of my argument ? I did forward many submissions after my Application in regard to Section 50 ,that is why my Application was processed successfully to the point of mediation and Registrar’s processing.
It was dismissed after one year of processing / delay tactics under Apotex’s criminal conspiracy.
It is submitted, that despite Counsel’s criminal definition of “prima Facie Case” my Case meets all criteria of Human Rights Code which originated from (amongst other factors) expressed in open manner (internally) my concerns in area of Health and Safety, conflict of interest as well product quality issues.
NO TIME LIMITATION ON HUMAN RIGHTS CASES
“The following is the text of the package of motions to amend Bill 107 which the Conservative Party presented to the Standing Committee on Justice Policy on November 29, 2006.
mot107pc.e
Motions package draft 5
Bill 107
An Act to amend the Human Rights Code
Motion to be moved in Committee
M
Section 6 of the Bill (clause 34 (2) (a) of the Human Rights Code)
I move that clause 34 (2) (a) of the Human Rights Code, as set out in section 6 of the Bill, be struck out.”
JURISDICTION –PRIMA FACIE CASE
All acts / facts do constitute a violation of the Human Rights Code.
I produced many particulars and statements which clearly established a Claim of discrimination on the bases of age, disability, ethnic origin, place of origin, reprisal and harassment.
I was terminated because of raised safety/ conflict of interest, product quality issues which prompted constant harassment, retaliation as well as discrimination (one of the tools Apotex utilized to deal with me / associated issues).
My Complaint pursuant to Section 50 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act against Respondent in 2006 was filled under guidance of Ontario Human Rights Commission and was selected / initiated by Ontario Labour Board.
I was very sick and impaired and I relied on Government Agencies to select the proper avenue to proceed with my concerns / claims/ allegations.
To submit by Counsel motion to dismiss my Application with out a hearing on the basis that it does not constitute a prima facie case of a violation of the Human Rights Code and constitutes an abuse of the Commission’s / Tribunal’s process is yet again demonstrating acts of discrimination, harassment and retribution.
Again, the reason why I did not file a complain with the Human Rights Commission back in 2004-or – 2005 is not because of the substance of my Complaint included sole issues of health and safety and quality of the product but because I WAS SICK, IMPAIRED UNDER INFLUENCE AS RESULT OF ADVERSE SIDE EFFECTS OF PSYCHIATRIC/ ANTIDEPRESSANT AND NARCOTICS and I relied on guidance of the Commission and other Government Agencies.
I was guided by Ontario Human Rights Commission right from the beginning and Commission send me to Labour Board where format of my Application was amended number of times.
Essentially Apotex’s Counsel is imposing on the Tribunal opinion whether or not the substance of my Application is within the jurisdiction of this Tribunal.
Apotex / Counsel are trying to define Tribunal’s jurisdiction and competence.
Apotex appears to believe that it can simply disregard Canadian Constitution, Law, and all Legislatives and manipulate in to own advantage all Government Agencies if that will assist it in adversarial tactics against Citizens. Canadian citizens can have little legal protection from major corporate interests if a corporation such as Apotex can so readily oppress an individual.
Company got engaged in intentional malicious conduct violating all statutes with a reckless indifference. It acted in the face of a perceived risk that its actions will violate all laws.
DUE TO RETRIBUTION, DISCRIMINATION (AGE, PLACE OF ORIGIN), HERRASMENT (EXPRESSED CONCERNS IN AREA OF HEALTH AND SAFETY, PRODUCT CONTAMINATION etc.) Apotex did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Tribunal and other Government Agencies, DENIED MEDICAL HELP as well obstructed Canadian Constitution etc.
Apotex committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury, criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did cause permanent disability, irreparable damage. Issues and/or events which occurred after my departure from Employer are also in full are Apotex’s liabilities due to fact that Apotex actively sabotaged legal /administrative proceedings in all Government Agencies in question. Preliminary matters are that Apotex In premeditated manner is torturing me for MANY, MANY years and pending. Company acts without any consideration for the human rights.
Apotex falsified all records provided by them to Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Tribunal and other Government Agencies (collectively Government) and engaged its employees in criminal conspiracy (documented) which untimely further deteriorates my state of health.
Many individuals involved in my Case purposely are omitting very critical evidence and medical conditions (or are reducing it in to insignificance).
Please focus on 7 years of my unprotected work with toxic / controlled substances/narcotics , which are known to cause my conditions even in dosages regularly prescribed by Doctors and much more/worse if over dosed.
Please start to question harmful molecules which Company processed not reviling nature /name of them and keeping in confidentiality Work Orders and Safety Data Sheets as well not providing any protection for employees.
Apotex committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury, criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did cause permanent disability, irreparable damage.
Company terrorized by many means any one / other employees voicing concerns about issues with Safety and quality of the products.
CIVIL LIABILITY does ARISE FROM BAD FAITH.
The matter is the one that falls under federal jurisdiction under the Constitution Act, 1867?
Respondent’s inconvenience in finding or locating own witnesses or documents does not constitute “substantial prejudice, nor does a “simple time delay”.
Documents / NOTES can not be lost / misplaced or “not maintained” in the pharmaceutical Company / Industry unless you do not generate any or purposely lose them. What about “good documentation practices”?
Policy mandatory in the Industry? Oh, right, Apotex has the Policy only for Authorities and to use it as a tool for propaganda.
Well, contrarily to Apotex I did observe the Policy in order to assist my ex- employer in achieving its vision / goals. Unfortunately, despite fact, that I utilized the Policy of “Good Documentation Practices” in good faith / into Company’s benefit, the Company punished me for it…
Company was #1 only because no one was checking any thing. No mechanisms in force to control SELF REGULATING PHARMACY!
For years sick people are turning 6′ under the ground due to contaminated medications!
Best Regards,
Apotex’s victim
Andrew
Dear Madam,
Lately, one of my many medical conditions deteriorated and imposes on me a lot of difficulties and enormous stress.
During my employment I developed lungs problem (due to product side effects- reported to Superiors and documented). My autonomic function of lungs (a function of the respiratory cycles) has been compromised.
More and more frequently I am stopping to breathe with out a warning. These are relatively short in duration episodes but I am not in control of them. Despite my conscious mind I struggle in-vein to take air and I can not make my lungs to move. I suspect that my neurons / neurotransmitters are affected / damaged (altered function / communication) by active ingredients at work.
As result of all my medical conditions I fear, that such undertaking as a trip for a hearing on preliminary issues may end up for me fatally. For very long time I do not go any where at all.
I scrolled trough Tribunal’s website and I discovered, that Tribunal’s extra ordinary powers do allow Tribunal to make its own rules of proceedings which allow performing Hearings in any way where appropriate ( “any part of a proceeding may be conducted in person or by way of a written hearing or electronically. The Tribunal may exercise any of its powers under these Rules on its own initiative or at the request of a party as well the Tribunal may waive or vary the application of any of these Rules where appropriate”).
Due to my circumstance, written format would be the best for me.
Since Tribunal already performed such proceeding and the Respondent forwarded all alleged preliminary issues which do not stand up to my allegations and due to fact that I did forward all evidence challenging alleged preliminary issues as well due to fact, that Respondent admitted all my allegations I am asking Tribunal, whether it is absolutely necessary for me to attend in person the hearing on preliminary issues which are not valid and serve Respondent as a tool to challenge my Application on technicalities.
I am not asking Tribunal in any way to postpone scheduled proceedings, because my medical condition most likely with time will gradually deteriorate not improve.
I am asking Tribunal to explore / implement alternative method of proceeding (if possible) to allow me some physical and emotional relief.
Apotex’s victim
Andrew
Ms. Patricia Grenier
Registrar – Transition
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
March 14/2010
Re: Letter / Decision dated March 11/2010
Dear Ms. Grenier,
Today, the day of March 11/2010 become another black day in life of disabled and suffering person (a victim) as well as in lives of all Ontarians, Canadians and humanity in other 115 Countries effected.
Today I started to understand in to full extend a comment made by one of my former Lawyers, which did sign with me a Retaining Agreement to represent me.
After long “DISCOVERY” process he announced, that Apotex forces him to dissolve his Agreement with me (to drop my Case) and Company stated to him, that “we have every thing –COVERED- AND WE ARE NOT WARRY ABOUT ANY ACTION TAKEN BY Complainant (we can take care of it)”.
Today become apparent, that Apotex very successfully managed to infiltrate all key/ strategic Government /Public’s Institutions with its agents enabling Company to commit crimes against Society with immunity and to do damage control if criminal activity goes out of control.
In 2004, at the time when I was critically sick /incapacitated, with very serious neurological symptoms/problems I inquired with Human Rights Commission about my situation (on advice of a strenger).
I was denied the right to fill in an Application with Commission. I was advised that my concerns are of such complex nature that can be dealt with by ANY jurisdiction. In 2004 Commission Number of times denied acceptance of my Application and any submissions.
I was (and am) horribly suffering from many medical conditions due to exposure to very toxic substances with out any personal protection and knowledge about molecules I was forced to work with ( due to strict confidentiality imposed on every thing by Apotex and notoric not compliance). Amongst disabilitateing neurological problems I suffered dissection of speech mechanism , so I was not in position to collaborate on any thing.
I struggled to generate a few sentences and based on those very limited sentences Commission determined a jurisdiction which suppose to deal with my concerns ( I could not comprexend / rationalize almost any thing so I follow (what I bolived the best advise).
At the time I was told by Commission, that some issues may be of simple clerical error.
Also I was proactively advised by Commission, that there is no time limitation on such cases like mine due to strong DISCRETIONARY powers by Commission/Administrative Tribunals and due to fact that the issues are involving very important INDUSTRY impacting interest of General Public etc.
As advised I started fruitless process directly with my former employer in anticipation of resolution/ settlement (documented).
After Apotex and large number of contacted by me Lawyers stone walled me I contacted repeatedly Commission which was keen on not accepting my Application.
Eventually I was directed to other Jurisdiction for assistance (Ontario Labour Relations Board).
Additional information, rationale of argument, evidence, witness’s statements, Doctors/Lawyers evidence, etc. are included in previous communications/Letters.
Now I understood why Commission repeatedly did refuse to receive my Application in 2004, why directed me ( a sick and impaired person WITH COMPROMISED SPEECH MECHANISM AND OTHER VERY SERIOUS NEUROLOGICAL PROBLEMS -I could not talk, walk, hold a pen nor rationale what is going on-DOCUMENTED BY WSiB, Psychiatrist and others) to struggle on my own with my former Employer (efforts to resolve issues are extensively documented) and why after very long delays it directed me to other jurisdictions instead of accepting it on its own and why Commission and other Government Agencies, Boards, Tribunals repeatedly stagnated / delayed/ dismissed my case despite legitimate allegations supported by hard evidence, witnesses statements, Doctors diagnosis (ONLY about 10 % of Doctors were willing to generate letters supporting life threatening medical conditions due to employer’s criminal negligence) , professional investigator’s Reports, Federal Agencies Reports etc.
The answer is: KEY GOVERNAMENT AGENCIES ARE INFILTRATED BY VERY THE SAME APOTEX’S AGENTS WHICH ARE DIRECTING COMPLAINANTS FROM THEMSELVES TO THEMSELVES BUT IN DIFERENT AGENCIES (jurisdictions) WHERE THEY ALSO ( parallel) OCUPPY TOP MANAGERIAL POSITIONS.
IT IS A CRIMINALLY ORGANIZED VISIOUS RING TO DESTROY / demoralize COMPLAINANTS AND DELUTE LIGITIMATE CASES IN TIME AND OVERWELMING ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS. THIS IS VERY SERIOUS SYSTEMIC PROBLEM AND IT BECOME POLITICALLY SENSITIVE.
Now it is apparent why employee’s complaints to Ministry of Labour about personal/ environmental contamination, product contamination etc. went with out any investigation/ response from the Ministry of Labour. Now it is understood why Ministry of Labour did not have any records of almost daily industrial accidents in Facility (employees were getting deadly sick / injured on daily bases, some got stroke, some heart attack, some died on the job (new sampler of incoming products died on the job etc.) and most Personnel after getting sick left the Company in panic.
Company criminally concealed names/ nature of processed products. Company processed products with out regulatory permits in Facility not approved for those products (not providing any personal protection for Personnel), did not post Safety Data Shits and did not disclose short and long term health hazards do to massive unprotected exposures.
Now it is obvious, why Ministry of Labour did criminally process my Application under SECTION 50 OF THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT violations and AT THE END dismissed it and sarcastically advised me to litigate against “legal assistance providers” (during imposed on me by Commission initial period of personal struggle with my former employer I approached all Lawyers recommended by Law Society of Upper Canada. None was brave enough to take my case.
Those who did engage in discovery process did this on behalf of Apotex in order to hold / stagnate my Case for as long period of time as possible. Tribunal’s Rules define /state that mistaken / misleading Lawyers advice / delay constitute applicant’s “Good FAITH”).
My Application to Labour Board, after one more year of criminal conspiracy to delay and derail was dismissed due to apparent 18 months delay (which is not truth).
Why Labour Board did not use their Jurisprudence/ discretionary power nor provisions of Occupational Health and Safety Act (R.S.O. 1990.Capter 0.1(5) which state “on an inquiry by the Board into a complaint filled under subsection (2), the burden of proof that an employer or person acting on behalf of an employer did not act contrary to subsection (1) lies upon the employer or the person acting on behalf of the employer.R.S.O. 1990,c.0.1,s.50(5),1998,c.8,s.56(2).
Answer: my Case was send from Commission (Ms. Rowan and accomplices) to Labour Board (Ms. Rowan and accomplices).
Dismissal “Decision” was articulated to me in the same terminology and in the same sentences.
Every Government Agency to which I was referred to by Commission did hold my case for maximum period of time and dismissing it due to “time factor”, every time adding a period in which they did hold my File. Each Agency refused my Application if I did have any thing pending some where else (documented).
Now Tribunal claims 4 years delay which Commission did fabricate / accumulate on my behalf due to its own criminal conspiracy. ALL PERIOD OF MY EMPLOYMENT AND ALL PERIOD AFTER THAT CONSTITUTES VIOLATIONS OF HUMAN RIGHTS CODE. All acts / facts do constitute a violation of the Human Rights Code.
The matter is the one that falls under federal jurisdiction under the Constitution Act, 1867?
“Late applications to the Tribunal:
(2) A person may apply under subsection (1) after the expiry of the time limit under that subsection if the Tribunal is satisfied that the delay was incurred in good faith and no substantial prejudice will result to any person affected by the delay. 2006, c. 30, s. 5.”
Tribunal rules
43. (1) The Tribunal may make rules governing the practice and procedure before it. 2006, c. 30, s. 5.
(3) Without limiting the generality of subsection (1), the Tribunal rules may,
(a) provide for and require the use of hearings or of practices and procedures that are provided for under the Statutory Powers Procedure Act or that are alternatives to traditional adjudicative or adversarial procedures;
CHAPTER 5: SECTION 34
Quality Standards
• It is important to underscore that this is discretion. There may be an absence of good faith and the presence of substantial prejudice, or both, yet the Commission can still choose to deal with the complaint. This may arise, for example, where a complaint involves important industry or sector wide concerns that have eluded investigation in other cases.
• However, there is no discretion where the Commission finds that there is the presence of good faith and also finds an absence of substantial prejudice. In that case, the Commission must “deal with” the complaint: Brome v. OHRC (1999), 35 C.H.R.R. D/469 (Div. Ct.).
Was the delay incurred in “good faith”?
• The term “good faith” has been interpreted in two ways. The broader reading requires an absence of bad faith or an ulterior motive. The narrower reading is that good faith actually requires more, i.e., the presence of some positive or good. While the matter has not yet been directly addressed in a human rights case, the Commission has generally adopted the narrower approach. In other words, the complainant must provide some positive reason for the delay in filing the complaint.
Decisions final
45.8 Subject to section 45.7 of this Act, section 21.1 of the Statutory Powers Procedure Act and the Tribunal rules, a decision of the Tribunal is final and not subject to appeal and shall not be altered or set aside in an application for judicial review or in any other proceeding unless the decision is patently unreasonable. 2006, c. 30, s. 5; 2009, c. 33, Sched. 2, s. 35 (3).
Why Ms. Caroline Rowan did not see it? Incompetence or criminal conspiracy?
Now it is understood why Apotex number of times discarded huge volumes of very toxic waste waters in to Lake Ontario and no one noticed any thing etc. ( Ontario Environment Minister Dan Newman introduced a bill October 10 in the Legislature that would give Ontario the toughest fines and longest jail terms in Canada for major environmental offences.
The Environmental Penalties Statute Law Amendment Act, 2000 would amend the penalty structure of the Environmental Protection Act, Ontario Water Resources Act and the Pesticides Act. The proposed penalties would:
• Increase the maximum fine for a first conviction of a major offence for a corporation from $1 million to $6 million per day, and for a subsequent conviction from $2 million to $10 million per day.
• Increase the maximum fine for a first conviction of a major offence for an individual from $100,000 to $4 million per day, and for subsequent convictions from $200,000 to $6 million per day.
• Increase the maximum jail terms for a person convicted of a major offence from two years to five years.
The penalty structure in the Ontario Water Resources Act would be amended to ensure that these new tough penalties apply to the most serious offences under the new Drinking Water Protection Regulation, including failure to report samples that exceed standards and failure to ensure minimum levels of treatment.
Mr. Newman has also announced the creation of a SWAT team, which will be a highly mobile compliance, inspection and enforcement unit.)
Ontario’s Commission as well as Tribunal of Human Rights is perpetuating culture of crime and violations of Human Rights in Ontario (operates as a coordination centre, predator / violator of human rights). Acts on behalf of Organizations violating all Laws and Legislatives and committing crimes against Citizens.
Tribunal acts as a coordinating link amongst Government Agencies committing crimes against Citizens.
Apotex managed to compromise operational integrity, mandate etc. of key Government Agencies, Commissions, Tribunals, Boards which suppose to protect General Public.
Apotex developed integrated and very successful network of crime in Ontario.
Now it is obvious, why Ontario become safe haven for big Corporations engaged in criminal activities?
Now we know how this happened, that private Corporation controls Lawyers, Doctors, Government Agencies etc.?
Tribunal as well as Ontario Labour Board, WSiB, Ontario Ombudsmen, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Worker Advisor Office, Service Canada, Fair Practices Commission and many other Government Agencies which repeatedly refused to report to Police crimes against me and General Public.
Commission, Tribunal, WSiB, Labour Board as well as other Government Agencies refused to report acts of Domestic and Global terrorism to Authorities/ Police.
Apotex become a bully who harms / attacks people who express concerns in area of Public Safety or are weaker or unable to defend themselves. Apotex exposed own employees to appalling and atrocious conditions at work.
Defendant, Apotex / Counsel displayed bad faith, arrogance, disrespect to Canadian Constitution, Human Rights, whole Justice System, Public Order. Tribunal etc.
Apotex is defiant, not regretful, with out remorse, not willing to correct wrong doings. Company, Tribunal as well as other Government Agencies (collectively GOVERNMENT) got engaged in intentional malicious conduct violating all statutes with a reckless indifference. It acted in the face of a perceived risk that its actions will violate all laws. Apotex /Counsel after 6 years of disabling me, torturing me, denials of medical help, denials of Constitutional and Law protection as well as many other criminal acts eventually admitted all allegations. Apotex refuse to plea “Guilty”, and in further criminal acts decided to challenge my Application on technicalities / alleged preliminary issues.
Apotex and all involved in sabotaging of my allegations must be INDICTED and convicted on multiple offences / crime (Criminal Code, Constitutional provisions, Bill – 45, Bill 107 and other Law provisions.
I was and am tortured by Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office, Service Canada, Office of the Worker Adviser, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Tribunal and some more Agencies. Canadian Government institutions mandated to assist General Public in time of misfortune, suffer and despair selected to engage in criminal activities and assist criminal Corporation which is stone waling an Ontarian / victim with life threatening medical conditions. Those Institutions deprived me from Constitutional and Law protection. Apotex and its accomplices denied me medical help, deprived me of all means of sustaining myself and are not regretful. Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office sentenced me and my family for life of suffer, despair, hunger and poverty. Apotex, Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario’s Ombudsmen Office shattered my and my family’s dreams and future. Apotex many times derailed my attempts to get help and justice.
IT IS SUBMITED THAT APOTEX’S CRIMINAL BEHAVIOUR IS EXTREME SO FORTH IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT AFTER SO MANY YEARS OF RETRIBUTION, DISCRIMINATION, HERRASEMENT, DENAIL OF MEDICAL HELP APOTEX /COUNSEL ADMITS ALL MY ALLEGATIONS (RESPONSE ON ALLEGED PRELIMINARY ISSUES, PAGE 3, OCT 22/2009 UNDER “JURISDICTION” ( ), BUT THIS TIME AROUND CLAIMING THAT THE ALLEGATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE A VIOLATION OF THE HUMAN RIGHTS CODE.
DUE TO APOTEX’S TORTURE, RETRIBUTION, DISCRIMINATION, HERRASEMENT DURRING MY EMPLOYMENT AND AFTER AND DENAIL OF MEDICAL HELP I SUSTAINED INJURIES AT WORK AND PERMANENT DISABILITIES SUFFERING A GREAT DEAL!
I was under influence / heavily impaired on psychiatric / antidepressants, narcotics and other potent medications before, during and after occurrence. Company in acts of retribution and criminal negligence exposed me to highly potent / dangerous toxic substances for 6.5 years period with out any Personal Protection Equipment.
- I was profoundly sick at the time of occurrence and after (I could not talk, hold a pan, walk, rationalize what was happening).
- Company abused my condition and committed crimes against me.
- Company deceived me with promises of a new job with out exposure to toxic substances at the time of occurrence and after.
You, Ms. Grenier are one of the top “links” in Tribunal’s structure (additionally residing in Toronto’s Branch of Amnesty International (see below info). Despite that you did not hesitate to entrust adjudication of my Case to an incompetent, acting in bad faith and on Apotex’s service “MEMBER” of the Tribunal with out any expertise in investigative techniques / methodology of Human Rights Law and Cases.
Ms. C. Rowan lacks knowledge in medical area and she did not seek any expert opinions from World’s Health Organization, Poison Centre, Advocates for Mental Disability Group, Psychiatry Advocacy Groups nor Center for Desise Control any other helpful expert sources. Her goal was to dismiss my Application for any reason (because my Case is pending with WSiB and fabricated apparent delay).
Tribunal inquiry
44. (1) At the request of a party to an application under this Part, the Tribunal may appoint a person to conduct an inquiry under this section if the Tribunal is satisfied that,
(a) an inquiry is required in order to obtain evidence;
(b) the evidence obtained may assist in achieving a fair, just and expeditious resolution of the merits of the application; and
(c) it is appropriate to do so in the circumstances. 2006, c. 30, s. 5.
Powers on inquiry
(6) A person conducting an inquiry may,
(a) request the production for inspection and examination of documents or things that are or may be relevant to the inquiry;
Tribunal (Ms. Rowan) ignored all of the McGuinty Government’s 10 key commitments on what Bill 107 will deliver to the public, including discrimination victims. See that full list of commitments.
In summary, the Government has made these 10 commitments:
1. Commitment of free legal representation for all human rights complainants.
2. Commitment that the Human Rights Legal Support Centre will investigate the cases of people they represent.
3. Commitment of the Human Rights Legal Support Centre to meet with everyone who wants legal representation.
4. Commitment to provide legal services across Ontario.
5. Commitment of Human Rights Legal Support Centre to pay for expert witnesses for their clients.
6. Commitment to having human rights cases decided within one year of filing a complaint under Bill 107.
7. Commitment that legal support to be provided to all regardless of income.
8. Commitment to establish Anti-Racism Secretariat and Disability Rights Secretariat at the Human Rights Commission.
9. Commitment that Human Rights Commission will become stronger force for human rights.
10. Commitment that Bill 107 responds to the Cornish and La Forest reports.
The “Member’s” adjudication of my Claim is criminal and in gross conflict of interest SO FORTH HER DECISIONS ARE CRIMINAL, INNVALID, NOT BINDING AND MUST BE REVOKED BY TRIBUNAL IMEDIETLY!
Ms. Caroline Rowan, a Tribunal “Member” ignored all evidence, witness’s statements, Doctor’s statements, WSiB’s Investigation Reports, Canadian Constitution, Chapter of Human Rights, Bill – 45, Bill-107 and all other Laws /Legislatives INCLUDING RATIONALE OF THE ARGUMENT.
Member adjudicating my Claim (Ms. Caroline Rowan) demonstrated incompetence or extreme, criminal attitude / behavior ( bad faith ) total ignorance, lack of knowledge in medical area of my situation/Application as well as she interpreted Tribunal’s Rules / Law in criminally BIAS manner.
She grossly obstructed Tribunal’s ADJUDICATIVE process by being in gross conflict of interest and ignoring all evidence and my medical condition. She assumed position of Facilitator, Accomplice/ accessory to the crimes against me and General Public.
Due to scope of criminal activities it must be classified as crimes against HUMANITY.
Caroline Rowan, of Toronto, was appointed to the Ontario Labour Relations Board as Vice-chair in 1999.
Ms. Caroline Rowan resides as a full time Vice-Chair at the Ontario Labour Relations Board (another Administrative Tribunal which under her management criminally sabotaged my Application under SECTION 50 OF THE OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY ACT), where she adjudicates matters arising under a variety of labour and employment related statutes and acts as an arbitrator of construction industry grievances. As I communicated to Tribunal before, Labour Board sabotages my Application after very prolonged time of conspiracy and delay.
She is also a part-time (with out remuneration so forth with out interest in being compliant) Member of the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario and acts as a private arbitrator and mediator (not Adjudicator!). Her fife year tenure ends in few months (25 Oct 2010) so she was selected to perform dirty work for a Tribunal in the storage Room. She is not qualified nor she has frame of mind to adjudicate any and especially complex cases of Human Rights Code/ Charter violations!
Since her call to the Bar in 1991, she has worked exclusively in the field of labour relations and employment law. She was in private practice for many years providing counsel on a wide range of labour and employment matters.
Appears, that Ms. Rowan does not meet requirements to be adjudicating such Cases of Human Rights violations.
(Requirements: The selection process for the appointment of members of the Tribunal is a competitive process. The criteria to be applied in assessing candidates include the following: Experience, knowledge or training with respect to human rights law and issues; Aptitude for impartial adjudication; Aptitude for applying the alternative adjudicative practices and procedures that may be set out in the Tribunal rules. She is taking a risk to be bias and in conflict with Tribunal’s Rules and Canada’s Law).
So one can conclude that under Ms. Rowan’s influence my Application to the Commission was not accepted on time, that under her manipulation I was forced to act on my own in initial stages (2004 -2005) and was stagnated in the process.
That is why after that I was directed from Commission to ONOTHER Ms. Rowan’s Office in the Labour Board where she further sabotaged my Application and after another year of delays dismissed it on bogus “time delay” bases. In all Agencies People were not interested in assisting me and punishing the offender.
All those representatives were stating to me” do not call us, we will call you”. If I wanted to protest or inquire periodically II was threatened with dismissal of my Application When I wanted to record such conversations I was refused consent to do so.
From Labour Board I was directed by Ms. Rowan (her subordinates) back to her Commission’s Office where eventually my Commission’s Application was accepted, but only to get stocked dormant in unofficial Files awaiting enactment of Bill 107.
Commission conducted number of sabotaging acts / movements forcing me to re-apply again this time to Tribunal.
It is submitted, that Member’s decision concerning my Application contain ad hoc rationalizations to avoid finding out, that Company’s activities are criminal and Respondent should be declared as the one committing crimes against humanity, committing acts of domestic and Global terrorism and should be investigated by Amnesty International, FBI, Ministry of Public Safety and trialed by Tribunal in Strasburg for such crimes. Now it is clear, why Government Agencies did refuse to accept my Applications in overlapping manner if I did have any situation pending somewhere else.
Maximal delay tactics.
Criminal individuals implanted in Public’s Institutions now how to work SYSTEM to make it useless/ failing the Citizens (in distress.) they suppose serve.
Apotex subjected me to the most horrifying experiences imaginable. BEYOND ANY DOUBT I WAS EXPOSED TO THE DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES WITH OUT ANY PROTECTION AND THAT THEY CAUSED THE ADVERSE EFFECTS AND INJURIES I NOW SUFFER (Documented). As result of Company’s negligence (exposure to advanced structural composite materials /chemicals used in the manufacturing processes which have been classified as to have a co- carcinogenic and/or synergistic effect I am disabled. I am suffering a great deal with life threatening medical conditions not able to afford groceries, needed medications or to pay any of my financial dues. I am not able to perform any chores around my residence, forced to relay on assistance. I was “swimming in” / a massive exposure with out any protection to a potent immunosuppressant, brain function controlling drugs (psychiatric), antidepressants and narcotics which overwhelmed my system.
The symptoms of Paxil withdrawal are among the most horrifying experiences imaginable. The symptoms can take your life and rip it to shreds, mocking your dignity and stealing your freedom. They ravage your soul. They deaden your spirit.
Ironically, death often seems like a blessing, so great is the pain of Paxil Withdrawal Symptoms.
Taking Paxil is like putting a loaded gun to your head. You better be damn sure you need it before you start.
The withdrawal process can mirror every depiction of hell. The paxil withdrawals can truly test your sanity. Perhaps the two worse mental expressions of the paxil withdrawals are the overwhelming feelings of being isolated, cut off from the world and even from loved ones, and the fear of permanently losing your sanity. The isolation stems in large part from the inability to express or even understand what is happening. Nobody can really look inside another person and know the degree of their suffering. The paxil withdrawals have always reminded me of the concentration camps of World War II. Some of the suffering is unimaginable, and certainly much is horrifying.
The bottom line - no one knows ahead of time if they will be one of the unfortunate who suffer horrendously, or if they will be spared the ravages of the paxil withdrawals.
Drugs, by definition - are poisons to the body. All drugs are poisons. Sometimes, however, a person’s state has reached the point where a poison is the best option.
Of all the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI’s) Paxil is generally considered to be the most potent. It also has the greatest number of side effects as well as the most severe withdrawal symptoms. There are hundreds of side effects of paxil. Paxil is nothing but a poison that causes all sorts of painful, unpleasant side effects. And sometimes the side effects don’t even show themselves until the user attempts to stop taking or being exposed to paxil.
It is a compilation of my own experience as well as that of the thousands. The symptoms redefine the term nightmare. Their nature is such, that you will find yourself questioning your sanity on a continual basis. Certain lethargy and a depression that was not there beforehand seems to have taken hold.
It appears that Paxil withdrawal can come in many variations.
In regard to DELAY, GOOD FAITH and other issues please refer to the my letter to Registrar – Transition Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario (Nov. 18/2009) and all other submissions which are voiding all rationale, conclusions, persuades made maliciously and in BAD FAITH by Ms. Caroline Rowan (“MEMBER”/ a Public’s enemy).
Apotex did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Tribunal and other Government Agencies, DENIED MEDICAL HELP as well obstructed Canadian Constitution etc.
Apotex committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury, criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did cause permanent disability, irreparable damage. Issues and/or events which occurred after my departure from Employer are also in full are Apotex’s liabilities due to fact that Apotex actively sabotaged legal /administrative proceedings in all Government Agencies in question. Preliminary matters are that Apotex In premeditated manner is torturing me for MANY, MANY years and pending. Company acts without any consideration for the human rights.
Apotex falsified all records provided by them to Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Tribunal and other Government Agencies (collectively Government) and engaged its employees in criminal conspiracy (documented) which untimely further deteriorates my state of health.
Apotex denied me medical help, Constitutional and Law protection, deprived mi of ability to get new job and/or provide for my self.
Regards,
Pc: AFTER FOLSYFING ALL SUBMISSIONS / EVIDENCE AND REFUSING TO REPORT SITUATION TO THE POLICE etc. WSiB CRIMINALLY DENIED MY CLAIM VERY LONG TIME AGO.
OFFICE OF WORKER ADVISER DID CRIMINALLY SEND MY FILE FROM ONE PERSON TO ANOTHER, FROM ONE OFFICE TO ONOTHER AND EVENTUALLY STOPPED TO COMMUNICATE WITH ME AT ALL. ON THE BEGINNING (AS IN ALL OTHER AGENCIES) I WAS TOLD NOT TO CALL/ INQUIRE ABOUT MY CASE (DO NOT CALL US, WE WILL CALL YOU).
FEW DAYS BEFORE TRIBUNAL’S DECISION WORKER ADVISER RE-APPEARED AND STARTED TO DUPLICATE WHAT ALREADY WAS DONE LONG, LONG TIME AGO.
“CRIMINAL ENTANGLES” EVIDENCE AND A VICTIM.
WHOLE PROCES IS DISCRIMINATORY AND CRIMINAL WITH IN IT SELF.
NO ONE IS OUT THERE TO HELP ?????!!!!!!
Andrew
In Ontario flourishes culture of crime at Government / Ministerial level.
Premier of Ontario, ( caring for people ) is being deceived by own Government Agencies which are overtaken by criminal element and are sabotaging Premier’s initiatives.
In Ontario Company commits crimes against population in 115 Countries.
Despite fact, that Government Agencies were aware of the situation for many years did not do any thing to rehabilitate the system (provided cover up for those activities).
People in position of power are promoting (become accessory) to Domestic and Global terrorism.
Despite Premier’s clearly defined mission / vision of improving quality of governance in Ontario and improving quality of lives for all Ontarians, Government Agencies refused to report crimes against General Public to Police / Authorities.
Many key Government Agencies are dysfunctional and criminal.
Situation demands urgent attention directly from Premier and a Public Inquiry!
Bill C-45 questions get answered
Wednesday, 28 May 2008 04:18 Cheryl Edwards
By way of reminder, Bill C-45 amended the Criminal Code to create new duties and possible criminal liability for individuals and organizations, which include corporations. Because of the complexity of these Criminal Code requirements, and the amount of time that has been passed since they became law in March 2004, answers to key questions about Bill C-45 amendments are set out below, as follows. By way of reminder, Bill C-45 amended the Criminal Code to create new duties and possible criminal liability for individuals and organizations, which include corporations. Because of the complexity of these Criminal Code requirements, and the amount of time that has been passed since they became law in March 2004, answers to key questions about Bill C-45 amendments are set out below, as follows:
Is the new Criminal Code duty different from OH&S duties to take all reasonable precautions or all reasonable care? How?
The new duty found in section 217.1 of the Criminal Code requires that “everyone who undertakes, or has the authority to direct how another person does work or performs a task, is under a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to that person, or any other person, arising from that work or task”. “Everyone” includes individuals, organizations as broadly defined, and corporations.
This duty parallels traditional OH&S standards, but also expands on the matters contained in most OH&S statutes. The duty applies to any individual with authority to direct another person in the performance of work, while OH&S legislation generally imposes duties on employers, supervisors, constructors, owners, directors and officers. The Criminal Code may apply more widely to anyone who “undertakes” to direct work, including lead hands and working forepersons.
The Criminal Code duty also requires that reasonable steps be taken to prevent bodily harm to any person, which would include the public or volunteers who may enter the workplace or be affected by workplace activities.
Does violation of the Criminal Code duty mean we are guilty of criminal negligence?
Breach of the Criminal Code duty does not necessarily mean that an organization or individual is guilty of criminal negligence. In order for a breach of the duty of care to amount to criminal negligence, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt in court that the breach of the duty occurred in a “wanton or reckless” manner.
Section 219 of the Criminal Code states that, “Everyone is criminally negligent who (a) in doing anything, or (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do, shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.” The provisions of Section 219 broadly state that for the purposes of the criminal negligence section, Section 219 of the Criminal Code, “duty” means a duty imposed by law.
Criminal cases have found that for criminal negligence to occur, a breach of a duty must represent a “marked” and significant departure from the standard of a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances. There must be more than mere failure to meet an OH&S or Criminal Code standard through inadvertence. There must be evidence of behaviour which shows complete disregard for, or indifference to the duty. As one court put it, there must be a finding of a “devil-may-care” attitude that shows a criminal standard has been met.
Wasn’t Bill C-45 all about creating criminal liability for directors and officers?
Not exactly. While the Westray inquiry which concluded in 1997 recommended that Canada “amend or introduce legislation to ensure that corporate executives and directors are held properly accountable for workplace safety and the wrongful and negligent acts of their corporations,” ultimately Bill C-45 created a mechanism which allowed corporations to be more readily convicted of criminal negligence. The Criminal Code continues to allow individual charges of criminal negligence, which could include charges against a supervisor, or director or officer, for breach of a duty in a wanton or reckless manner, but that was not the primary focus of the Bill C-45 amendments when they were passed and came into force in 2004.
Does Bill C-45 create both corporate and individual criminal liability?
Yes, it does both. The provisions create new criminal duties and liabilities for both individuals and organizations (which are defined to include corporations). Both individuals and organizations can now be convicted of criminal negligence for failure to perform the duty, when it occurs in a manner that shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of others.
What is necessary for an organization (including a corporation) to be convicted under the Criminal Code of criminal negligence?
The process for convicting an organization of criminal negligence in the workplace safety context involves two steps. First, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the actions of a single representative (employee, partner, contractor, agent of the organization) breached the Criminal Code duty in a wanton or reckless way. This could involve reckless ignoring of safety rules or physical protective devices where the potential result is serious harm or death.
Second, after the breach of duty is established, the Crown must then show that a senior officer with operational or executive authority, or as drafters put it, someone with “real clout” who is responsible for the part of the organization involved in the breach, either failed to act or insulated themselves from obtaining the knowledge to act. The Crown has to prove a marked departure from what would reasonably be expected of a senior officer with obligations to protect workers and the public.
What are the potential liabilities under the Criminal Code provisions as amended by Bill C-45?
For individuals, the maximum penalty for criminal negligence causing death is life imprisonment, and the maximum penalty for criminal negligence causing bodily harm is ten years’ imprisonment. However, individuals are subject to a range of Criminal Code sentencing options from absolute discharge, to probation, to life in prison, depending on the specific circumstances of the contravention.
Organizations, including corporations, are subject to different penalties depending on how the Crown proceeds. Where the Crown proceeds by summary conviction (the least serious manner of proceeding), the maximum fine is $100,000 for an organization.
Where the Crown proceeds by indictment (the most serious manner of proceeding), there is no limit on the amount of the fine for the corporation or organization.
Organizations may also be placed on probation and the terms of a probationary order can include such matters as: requiring the organization to make restitution, financial or otherwise, relating to the offence; requiring the organization to report to the court or the public on implementation of remedial steps; requiring the appointment of a senior officer to be responsible for implementing remedial procedures; requiring the organization to disclose its conviction to the public.
Probation orders including these types of terms are available in addition to monetary penalties.
Cheryl A. Edwards is a former Ontario Ministry of Labour OH&S prosecutor and now leads Heenan Blaikie’s national OHS and WSIB practice group. Cheryl is recognized as one of Canada’s leading lawyers in workplace safety and insurance and occupational health and safety law.
Andrew
Ms. Patricia Grenier
Registrar – Transition
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
Dear Ms. Grenier,
Apotex subjected me to disabling and deadly withdrawal effects associated with Paxil and other products Apotex exposed me to.
Apotex subjected me to the most horrifying experiences imaginable. BEYOND ANY DOUBT I WAS EXPOSED TO THE DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES WITH OUT ANY PROTECTION AND THAT THEY CAUSED THE ADVERSE EFFECTS AND INJURIES I NOW SUFFER (Documented). As result of Company’s negligence (exposure to advanced structural composite materials /chemicals used in the manufacturing processes which have been classified as to have a co- carcinogenic and/or synergistic effect I am disabled. I am suffering a great deal with life threatening medical conditions not able to afford groceries, needed medications or to pay any of my financial dues. I am not able to perform any chores around my residence, forced to relay on assistance. I was “swimming in” / a massive exposure with out any protection to a potent immunosuppressant, brain function controlling drugs (psychiatric), antidepressants and narcotics which overwhelmed my system.Company criminally concealed records of almost daily industrial accidents in Facility (employees were getting deadly sick / injured on daily bases, some got stroke, some heart attack, and most Personnel after getting sick left the Company in the panic.
Company criminally concealed names/ nature of processed products. Company processed products with out regulatory permits in Facility not approved for those products (not providing any personal protection for Personnel), did not post Safety Data Shits and did not disclose short and long term health hazards do to massive unprotected exposures.
Apotex exposed own employees to appalling and atrocious conditions at work.
Defendant, Apotex / Counsel displayed bad faith, arrogance, disrespect to Canadian Constitution, Human Rights, whole Justice System, Public Order, Tribunals etc.
Apotex is defiant, not regretful, with out remorse, not willing to correct wrong doings.
What a crime it was to drop me off “cold turkey” when I was withdrawn creating additional damage and leading me into an additional serotonin nightmare. Apotex did not allow me to withdraw gradually?
Apotex, who exposes own employees to these extremely addictive drugs with out any protection, with no warning of the addictive properties should be held accountable for the results of that lack of warning and criminal negligence.
Apotex did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Ontario Labor Board, WSiB (Workers Compensation Insurance Board), Ontario Human Rights Commission, Ontario Health Act , Ontario Labor Law as well obstructed Canadian Constitution etc.
Apotex committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury , criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did cause permanent disability, irreparable damage,
Apotex and all involved in sabotaging of my allegations must be INDICTED and convicted on multiple offences / crime (Criminal Code, Constitutional provisions, Bill – 45, Bill 107, Bill - 168 and other Law provisions ).
Bill C-45 questions get answered by Cheryl Edwards
By way of reminder, Bill C-45 amended the Criminal Code to create new duties and possible criminal liability for individuals and organizations, which include corporations. Because of the complexity of these Criminal Code requirements, and the amount of time that has been passed since they became law in March 2004, answers to key questions about Bill C-45 amendments are set out below, as follows. By way of reminder, Bill C-45 amended the Criminal Code to create new duties and possible criminal liability for individuals and organizations, which include corporations. Because of the complexity of these Criminal Code requirements, and the amount of time that has been passed since they became law in March 2004, answers to key questions about Bill C-45 amendments are set out below, as follows:
Is the new Criminal Code duty different from OH&S duties to take all reasonable precautions or all reasonable care? How?
The new duty found in section 217.1 of the Criminal Code requires that “everyone who undertakes, or has the authority to direct how another person does work or performs a task, is under a legal duty to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to that person, or any other person, arising from that work or task”. “Everyone” includes individuals, organizations as broadly defined, and corporations.
This duty parallels traditional OH&S standards, but also expands on the matters contained in most OH&S statutes. The duty applies to any individual with authority to direct another person in the performance of work, while OH&S legislation generally imposes duties on employers, supervisors, constructors, owners, directors and officers. The Criminal Code may apply more widely to anyone who “undertakes” to direct work, including lead hands and working forepersons.
The Criminal Code duty also requires that reasonable steps be taken to prevent bodily harm to any person, which would include the public or volunteers who may enter the workplace or be affected by workplace activities.
Does violation of the Criminal Code duty mean we are guilty of criminal negligence?
Breach of the Criminal Code duty does not necessarily mean that an organization or individual is guilty of criminal negligence. In order for a breach of the duty of care to amount to criminal negligence, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt in court that the breach of the duty occurred in a “wanton or reckless” manner.
Section 219 of the Criminal Code states that, “Everyone is criminally negligent who (a) in doing anything, or (b) in omitting to do anything that it is his duty to do, shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of other persons.” The provisions of Section 219 broadly state that for the purposes of the criminal negligence section, Section 219 of the Criminal Code, “duty” means a duty imposed by law.
Criminal cases have found that for criminal negligence to occur, a breach of a duty must represent a “marked” and significant departure from the standard of a reasonably prudent person in the circumstances. There must be more than mere failure to meet an OH&S or Criminal Code standard through inadvertence. There must be evidence of behaviour which shows complete disregard for, or indifference to the duty. As one court put it, there must be a finding of a “devil-may-care” attitude that shows a criminal standard has been met.
Wasn’t Bill C-45 all about creating criminal liability for directors and officers?
Not exactly. While the Westray inquiry which concluded in 1997 recommended that Canada “amend or introduce legislation to ensure that corporate executives and directors are held properly accountable for workplace safety and the wrongful and negligent acts of their corporations,” ultimately Bill C-45 created a mechanism which allowed corporations to be more readily convicted of criminal negligence. The Criminal Code continues to allow individual charges of criminal negligence, which could include charges against a supervisor, or director or officer, for breach of a duty in a wanton or reckless manner, but that was not the primary focus of the Bill C-45 amendments when they were passed and came into force in 2004.
Does Bill C-45 create both corporate and individual criminal liability?
Yes, it does both. The provisions create new criminal duties and liabilities for both individuals and organizations (which are defined to include corporations). Both individuals and organizations can now be convicted of criminal negligence for failure to perform the duty, when it occurs in a manner that shows wanton or reckless disregard for the lives or safety of others.
What is necessary for an organization (including a corporation) to be convicted under the Criminal Code of criminal negligence?
The process for convicting an organization of criminal negligence in the workplace safety context involves two steps. First, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the actions of a single representative (employee, partner, contractor, agent of the organization) breached the Criminal Code duty in a wanton or reckless way. This could involve reckless ignoring of safety rules or physical protective devices where the potential result is serious harm or death.
Second, after the breach of duty is established, the Crown must then show that a senior officer with operational or executive authority, or as drafters put it, someone with “real clout” who is responsible for the part of the organization involved in the breach, either failed to act or insulated themselves from obtaining the knowledge to act. The Crown has to prove a marked departure from what would reasonably be expected of a senior officer with obligations to protect workers and the public.
What are the potential liabilities under the Criminal Code provisions as amended by Bill C-45?
For individuals, the maximum penalty for criminal negligence causing death is life imprisonment, and the maximum penalty for criminal negligence causing bodily harm is ten years’ imprisonment. However, individuals are subject to a range of Criminal Code sentencing options from absolute discharge, to probation, to life in prison, depending on the specific circumstances of the contravention.
Organizations, including corporations, are subject to different penalties depending on how the Crown proceeds. Where the Crown proceeds by summary conviction (the least serious manner of proceeding), the maximum fine is $100,000 for an organization.
Where the Crown proceeds by indictment (the most serious manner of proceeding), there is no limit on the amount of the fine for the corporation or organization.
Organizations may also be placed on probation and the terms of a probationary order can include such matters as: requiring the organization to make restitution, financial or otherwise, relating to the offence; requiring the organization to report to the court or the public on implementation of remedial steps; requiring the appointment of a senior officer to be responsible for implementing remedial procedures; requiring the organization to disclose its conviction to the public.
Probation orders including these types of terms are available in addition to monetary penalties.
Cheryl A. Edwards is a former Ontario Ministry of Labour OH&S prosecutor and now leads Heenan Blaikie’s national OHS and WSIB practice group. Cheryl is recognized as one of Canada’s leading lawyers in workplace safety and insurance and occupational health and safety law.
Regards,
Andrew
Ms. Patricia Grenier
Registrar – Transition
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
Dear Ms. Grenier,
As I proved many times before I was guided by Human Rights Commission on my way to/for Justice right from the beginning of my case (DUE TO COMMISION’S “MANDATE” I WAS TRANSFERRED/ GUIDED TO DIFERRENT JURISDICTIONS FOR PROCESSING).
Furthermore, a person who experiences discrimination ( and yet impaired and very sick )likely has less power and resources than the offender – who might also hire a private lawyer – and an uneven match-up of legal expertise would be a strong disincentive to filing a human rights claim. This may be particularly relevant to people who experience considerable systemic disadvantage, and who may not have the financial resources, time, or familiarity with the Canadian legal system to hire a lawyer (or ne prevented from hireing a lawyer). A related concern is that even if the Tribunal conducts many more hearings each year, some hearings may proceed quickly because they appear easily resolvable due to an unrepresented complainant’s particular framing of the facts to the law. Tribunal in its proceedings ignored Government directives, Law, Legislatives, Constitution and its own Rules.
Tribunal ignored all of the McGuinty Government’s 10 key commitments on what Bill 107 will deliver to the public, including discrimination victims. See that full list of commitments.
“In summary, the Government has made these 10 commitments:
1. Commitment of free legal representation for all human rights complainants.
2. Commitment that the Human Rights Legal Support Centre will investigate the cases of people they represent.
3. Commitment of the Human Rights Legal Support Centre to meet with everyone who wants legal representation.
4. Commitment to provide legal services across Ontario.
5. Commitment of Human Rights Legal Support Centre to pay for expert witnesses for their clients.
6. Commitment to having human rights cases decided within one year of filing a complaint under Bill 107.
7. Commitment that legal support to be provided to all regardless of income.
8. Commitment to establish Anti-Racism Secretariat and Disability Rights Secretariat at the Human Rights Commission.
9. Commitment that Human Rights Commission will become stronger force for human rights.
10. Commitment that Bill 107 responds to the Cornish and La Forest reports.”
Tribunal (“Member”) ignored Canadian Constitution, Chapter of Human Rights, Bill – 45, Bill-107 and all other Laws /Legislatives.
I am asking Tribunal to promptly revers its decision .
Apotex should enter the Criminal guilty plea voluntarily to avoid further damages to a victim, reduce Public’s impact and fulfill its obligations.
Andrew
Dear Sir/Madam,
On March 11/2010, after very long period of criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, obstruction and denial of Constitutional / Law protection, denial of medical help, torture, denial of all means of sustaining my self and many more aggravating / criminal acts I received Tribunal’s of Human Rights negative decision.
On March 22/2010 I forwarded an Application (Form TR-8) for Reconsideration of the Decision on the grounds of:
a. There are new facts and evidence that could potentially be determinative of the case and that could not reasonably have been obtained earlier.
b. The decision is in conflict with established case Law or Tribunal procedure and the proposed reconsideration involves a matter of general or public importance.
c. The decision is patently unreasonable.
d. Other factors exist that outweigh the public interest in the finality of Tribunal decisions.
The Request for Reconsideration was received by Ms. Grenier –Registrar /Tribunal on Apr 06 / 2010.
Unfortunately again Ms. Grenier-Registrar denied me all provisions of Bill-107.
Tribunal denied me all McGuinty Government’s 10 key commitments on what Bill 107 will deliver to the public, including discrimination victims. See that full list of commitments.
In summary, the Government has made these 10 commitments:
1. Commitment of free legal representation for all human rights complainants.
2. Commitment that the Human Rights Legal Support Centre will investigate the cases of people they represent.
3. Commitment of the Human Rights Legal Support Centre to meet with everyone who wants legal representation.
4. Commitment to provide legal services across Ontario.
5. Commitment of Human Rights Legal Support Centre to pay for expert witnesses for their clients.
6. Commitment to having human rights cases decided within one year of filing a complaint under Bill 107.
7. Commitment that legal support to be provided to all regardless of income.
8. Commitment to establish Anti-Racism Secretariat and Disability Rights Secretariat at the Human Rights Commission.
9. Commitment that Human Rights Commission will become stronger force for human rights.
10. Commitment that Bill 107 responds to the Cornish and La Forest reports.
With Request for Reconsideration I forwarded 252 pages of NEW, printed /copied material with detailed cross references to Pages with relevant supporting information so the evidence / material could be understood by “children”.
Unfortunately Ms, Grenier –Registrar again directed my Request for Reconsideration to the same incompetent “member” acting uniterally in the back Room on behalf of the Employer in “bad faith”.
Again Caroline Rowan acted for Employer (that where her expertise is - labour Law).
Caroline Rowan (“MEMBER”) disregarded NEW EVIDENCE ( Doctor’s statements about periods of my total impairment during my employment - DUE TO UNPROTECTED /MASSIVE EXPOSURES TO VERY POTENT ANTI DEPRESSANTS, PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS, NARCOTICS AND MANY OTHER VERY TOXIC/POTENT ACTIVES, at the time of criminal termination with out required “just cause” for personal/political/ criminal reasons (of a sick/impaired/disabled employee) and ever after, document from WSiB conforming my impairment, Company Doctor’s statement refusing cooperation and conformation of my visits ( as well as visits of other employees with injuries and adverse side effects due to exposures to products etc.).
Tribunal ignored Canadian Constitution, Chapter of Human Rights, Bill – 45, Bill-107, Bill-168 and all other Laws /Legislatives as well as Criminal Code.
Tribunal/ Ms. Rowan very quickly /uniterally in the back Room ( with in 12 days including weekend) denied my request for Reconsideration ( on April 19/ 2010) stating as a reason “time delay” which Commission /Tribunal accumulated on behalf of me in criminal conspiracy with other Government Agencies (documented).
Tribunal effectively denied me options to be assisted, represented and protected under Constitutional and Law provisions.
A time ago I notified Office of the Premier of Ontario Mr. McGuinty about pending organized criminal activities at Government level urgently needing his Office/ authority involvement.
As of yet I did not get any reply.
Today I started to ask my self, whether Canada has the right to pretend domestically and internationally that is a Nation promoting/protecting Human Rights all around the World?
I started to question, whether Canada is nation bringing blessing to other Nations or is an invader of other Nations realizing imperialistic agendas in the name of Human Rights protection?
Appears, that under smoke screen of Human Rights protection, Canada is imposing own perception of “HUMAN RIGHTS” on other nations in order to realize Global Imperialistic agendas.
While Canada reinforces/imposes its own version of “Human Rights “on other cultures, domestically is very far from being raw model / compliant.
May case conform the situation?
Canada’s Human Rights Commission and a Tribunal are the rootless violators of Human Rights and criminal identities. Canada needs to organize and permanently establish Human Rights system in own house before starting to reinforce/ impose them on other Nations.
Regards,
Andrew
Office of the Worker Adviser
Ministry of Labour
( Att: Ms. Townsend)
Re: WSiB
Dear Ms. Townsend,
Your Letter dated May 04/2010 informing me about your (WA’s) decision to
uniterally close my File proves yet again, that my suspicions/ allegations
are valid.
Despite your acknowledgement of my serious medical conditions prohibiting me
from engaging in conversations over the phone and my request to carry on all communications in writing you have decided to abound a sick / disable person because you believe in your inability to engage in direct conversations with me will make representing me very difficult for you.
Well, no one did say, that representing sick/ disabled person with many neurological problems suppose to be easy a specially, that the goal of all Agencies was and it is to make me unsuccessful in my drive to justice.
I can understand that conversation may play integral part of your relationship with your clients on “normal” circumstance.
Since I am disabled person with drug - induced neuropsyhiatric/neurological problems with many clinical manifestations (significantly compromised speech mechanism, frequent thought blockages, memory disturbances and many more
etc.)I expected from you more innovation and proactiwness/accomodation.
Your statement “I am not comfortable with the method of representation that
you propose” is appalling!
I believe , that you do not have so much problems with recommended by me
method of representation as much as with fact, that I asked you to report crimes against me and General Public to POLICE.
Your decline to do so violates the Law and may be subjected to investigation.
Original Retainer was amended on request of Worker Adviser Representative.
I was following directives of previous Representative which prohibited me
from acting on my own in any circumstances.
Worker Adviser proactively prompted me to forward additional medical conditions which were omitted by WSiB.
The Worker Adviser decided to amend my WSiB’s Application and process Appeal
accordingly.
If you would scroll / study my File in sequence , you would discover every
thing you need to know / every thing you question, including Worker Adviser’s
request to AUTOMATICALLY AND PROMPTLY RETURN MY APPEAL TO PROPER LEVEL IF
RECONSIDERATION WOULD BE UNSUCCESSFUL.
Your behavior, conclusions, actions conform, that you lack of familiarity with content of my File and / or you are under some negative influence.
Worker Adviser guided me on every step of proceeding and I did not act on my
own.
Worker Adviser proactively undertake upon itself to amend scope of
representation.
Former Representative was PROFESSIONAL / KNOWLEDGEABLE AND THAT WAS THE
REASON WHY HE WAS REPLACED WITH PEOPLE WILLING TO COMPROMISE MY CASE.
So, if you Ms. Townsend would check all my previous correspondence with
Worker Adviser, probably you would have all your answers.
I communicated to you before, that Apotex prevented me from obtaining any
Lawyers/ paralegal Service, so I am with out any representation.
Closure of my file by your Office on such circumstance make you and your
Office liable for all adverse effects on my Case/me and places you and your
Office in position of criminal conspiracy/ criminal negligence, accessory to
the crime just to mention a few.
The set of rules that stipulate that you can not continue to represent
someone if he/she has any misgivings about your ability to represent him/her
are excuse for not diligent representation.
Worker Adviser refuses to accommodate “not regular” circumstance/ client
with severe/ demobilizing medical conditions.
Worker Adviser must earn faith of their clients.
Whether it is WA’s responsibility to report crimes to Police or not was
decided by Ministry of Public Safety.
I suppose they know their stuff, or are you undermining their competence?
Your decision to close my File due to inadequate reasons (because it is more
difficult to represent disabled / with limitations) person and because I do
not have confidence in Worker Adviser it is from my perspective criminal
with in it self.
After all MY CASE WAS AND IS STAGNATED FOR OVER SIX YEARS INCLUDEDEING TWO
YEARS BY WORKER ADVISER.
How you want to explain this to a sick/ disabled/ suffering person who was
denied for six + years medical help and all means of sustaining himself?
Dear Ms. Townsend, I am attaching another WARNING LETTER issued by FDA to
Apotex highlighting very serious deviations/non compliance.
Please reassess your decision to close my File and denial of representing
me.
I need special accommodation which demands a bit more of effort on behalf of
Worker Adviser.
Regards,
Pc: Protracted correspondence between drugmakers and the FDA in sorting out
the fixes to GMP violations is likely becoming a high-risk undertaking. The
FDA has indicated that from here on in, it will have limited tolerance for
manufacturers that make promises they don’t keep. Instead of sending stern
replies as follow-up to incomplete and inadequate drugmaker responses to
warning letters, the regulator is now planning to prosecute.
Andrew
Despite Premier McGuinty’s clearly defined mission / vision of improving quality of governance in Ontario and improving quality of lives for all Ontarians, many key Government Agencies are dysfunctional and criminal.( on service for private interest –Apotex). In Ontario flourishes culture of crime at Government / Ministerial level.
Premier of Ontario, ( caring for people ) is being deceived by own Government Agencies which are overtaken by criminal element and are sabotaging Premier’s initiatives. I was deprived by Apotex and AGENTIAL ACOMPLICES of all provisions of Canadian Constitution, Law, Employment Standards, Health and Safety Act, of all Government’s initiatives which did not apply to me and many more!!!!!!
Situation demands urgent attention directly from Premier and a Public Inquiry!
“Ministry of Labour
McGuinty Government Increasing Benefits For Lowest Paid Workers- ( not for me!)
2007 Budget Includes Key Initiatives To Ensure Workers Are Treated Fairly
TORONTO, May 11 /CNW/ - With the passage of the 2007 Ontario budget, the
McGuinty government is helping our most vulnerable workers (?), increasing
benefits to injured workers and speeding up resolution of employment standards
claims, Labour Minister Steve Peters announced today.
“The health and safety of Ontario workers is a priority for our
government,” (?)said Peters. “We are helping Ontario’s lowest-paid workers
benefit from Ontario’s economic strength, and have put in place policies to
ensure fairness and improved service delivery.”
<<
The 2007 Ontario budget provides benefits to workers by:
- Raising the minimum wage by 75 cents a year for three years until it
reaches $10.25 on March 31, 2010
- Improving Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB) benefits for
about 155,000 injured workers through increases of 2.5 per cent each
year for the next three years, starting July 1, 2007
- Committing $3.6 million to tackle the backlog of employments
standards claims
“This is about ensuring that all Ontarians are treated fairly,” Peters
said. “This is just one more example of how, working together, Ontarians can
continue to live and work in a successful, caring and compassionate society.”
——————————————————————-
IMPROVING FAIRNESS, ACCESS, AND FLEXIBILITY IN THE WORKPLACE SAFETY
AND INSURANCE SYSTEM ( not for me! - WHY?)
Amendments to the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA) in the
recently passed Ontario budget are part of the government’s overall plan to
help injured workers. The proposed changes will increase Workplace Safety and
Insurance Board (WSIB) benefits and provide greater fairness and flexibility
to the workplace safety and insurance system for injured workers.
Benefit Increases
The budget provides a 2.5 per cent increase in WSIB benefits in each of
three consecutive years for injured workers who are not 100 per cent disabled.
These recipients receive what is called partial benefits. There are
approximately 155,000 such recipients. Over the past 12 years these injured
workers have seen a significant deterioration in their purchasing power
because of the way WSIB benefits are indexed to inflation.
Injured workers who are 100 per cent disabled, along with their survivors
and dependants, receive an annual cost of living increase equal to the
percentage change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Canada.
Since 1995, workers receiving partial benefits have received an annual
increase in accordance with a ‘general indexing factor.’ Between January 1,
1995 and December 31, 1997, the factor provided for an annual adjustment of 75
per cent of the CPI minus one (with a cap of four per cent, but not less than
0 per cent.)
The current general indexing factor came into effect on January 1, 1998.
It provides for an annual adjustment of 50 per cent of the CPI minus one (with
a cap of four per cent, but not less than 0 per cent). For example, the
increase for 2007 was 0.1 per cent.
The budget establishes a 2.5 per cent increase on July 1, 2007 and a
temporary indexing factor of 2.5 per cent for the years beginning January 1,
2008, and January 1, 2009.
Since 1995, long-term benefits for injured workers receiving partial
benefits have increased only 2.9 per cent due to the general indexing factor,
while inflation has increased by almost 29 per cent. The budget proposal would
see monthly benefits increase by 7.5 per cent over an 18-month period, more
than double the increase given over the past 12 years.
The budget also provides for Ontario Lieutenant Governor in Council
regulation-making authority to prescribe indexation increases to benefits
after the end of 2009. This means legislative change would not be needed for
future indexation increases.
Reviewing Cases 72 Months After Injury
WSIB benefits for injured workers are generally fixed or “locked in” 72
months after the date of the worker’s injury.
The WSIB had restricted ability to review cases after this 72-month
period.
The changes provide additional circumstances where the WSIB can review
such cases. For example, under the proposals, an injured worker whose benefits
are “locked in” could be reviewed due to a temporary or permanent
deterioration in his or her condition that is related to the original injury.
Determining Benefits Based On Suitable and Available Employment
This change requires the WSIB to determine and calculate benefits for
injured workers re-entering the labour market based on what they are likely to
earn from employment that is both suitable and available.
Under former provisions of the WSIA, an injured worker’s benefits could
be reduced or terminated if the worker can return to suitable work even though
this work is not available. The WSIB “deemed” what an injured worker is able
to earn based on training and physical rehabilitation. This calculation did
not take labour market conditions into consideration.
The change will require the WSIB to base loss of earnings benefits on
employment that is available.
Lump Sum Payments for Injured Workers
The budget requires the WSIB to pay out a lump sum retirement payment in
lieu of a monthly income to injured workers who reach the age of 65 if the
benefit to which they would be entitled amounts to less than $3,000 per year.
The figure was $1,166.41.
The WSIB provides a benefit for loss of retirement income to certain
workers who have received loss of earnings benefits for at least 12 continuous
months. The WSIB sets aside an amount equal to five per cent of their benefits
to be paid as retirement income when the recipient reaches age 65.
Previously, a worker whose retirement account did not produce an income
of $1,166.41 or more per year received their account balance in one lump sum
payment. The change will provide for a lump sum payment if the annual amount
is less than $3,000. This responds to requests from injured workers.
Providing Broader Representation on the WSIB Board of Directors
In February 2004 the government ordered a third-party audit to assess and
recommend improvements to the WSIB. Among the recommendations was that the
Board of Directors be increased and that the same person could not occupy both
the positions of Chair and President of the Board.
In the new budget, the size of the Board of Directors has been increased
so there is a minimum of seven members and a maximum of nine members in
addition to the President and Chair. The same person cannot be President and
Chair.
Increased Funding for the Office of the Worker Adviser (DISFUNCTIONAL)
The mandate of the Office of the Worker Adviser (OWA) is to educate,
advise, and represent non-unionized workers and their survivors in workplace
safety and insurance matters. This agency plays a critical role in supporting
these injured workers who have to deal with the many complexities and levels
of appeal in the workers’ compensation system.
The OWA now has increased resources to improve and expand services to
injured workers and their survivors. The increase of $810,000 per year in
ongoing funding will allow the OWA to serve more clients in the province.
The OWA currently represents cases where there is a “significant” chance
of success and at least eight weeks of benefits at stake. With increased
funding, this criterion has been changed to a “reasonable” chance of success
and at least four weeks of benefits at stake for cases to be considered.
Injured Worker Groups Consulted Prior to Changes
Changes to the WSIA were made after consultation with a number of groups,
including Bright Lights, Injured Workers’ Consultants, Ontario Network for
Injured Workers Groups (ONIWG), and the Thunder Bay & District Injured Workers
Groups. MPPs Michael Gravelle, Jennifer Mossop, and the late Dominic Agostino
played important roles that contributed to the proposed legislation.
GOVERNMENT SPEEDING UP CLAIMS RESOLUTION
As the result of a number of factors, claims under the Employment
Standards Act by employees for such things as termination pay, unpaid wages
and vacation pay have increased and created a backlog of unresolved claims.
Factors Leading to an Increase in Claims
In 2006, the Ministry of Labour introduced internet filing of claims and
partnered with ServiceOntario to provide and accept claims through
ServiceOntario Centres, increasing the number of locations where clients can
access Employment Standards claim forms from 21 to 63 locations province-wide.
The convenient 24/7 online filing system and increased accessibility through
ServiceOntario Centres has made it easier for employees to file claims.
The Ministry of Labour has also been conducting outreach and awareness
efforts aimed at diverse communities to increase knowledge of employment
standards law in Ontario. The government has announced in recent years
partnerships with organizations such as the Centre for Information and
Community Services (CICS) in Scarborough and SISO (Settlement and Integration
Services Organization) of Hamilton who provide training and orientation to
clients in diverse and new communities. The ministry has educated the
organizations’ counsellors in employment standards law and they, in turn, are
able to foster an understanding of workplace rights and responsibilities in
clients from diverse cultures and in diverse languages.
The government also put emphasis on proactive inspections in targeted
sectors of the economy where workers are at most risk of not getting their
employment standards rights. The Ministry of Labour has a dedicated
enforcement team for this purpose.
New Funds Supporting Initiatives
In the recently passed budget, the government committed to protecting the
legislated employment rights of Ontario’s most vulnerable workers by dealing
with the backlog of claims they have filed under the Employment Standards Act.
There will be an additional $3.6 million annually to address
uninvestigated employment standards complaints. The goal is to improve
frontline service and shorten claims resolution times. The new funds will be
used to increase staffing to improve efficiencies in the claims triage and
early resolution process. They will also be used to provide additional support
to expedite the investigation of claims.
The Ministry of Labour receives more than 20,000 claims annually.
Andrew
Dear Sir, please PREVENT Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. K. Koos (Apotex) on Criminal Grounds of Inadmissibility / committing acts which constitute the essential elements of a crime involving moral turpitude ( FROUD, CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY AND MANY MORE) , from participation in adjudicative process. An attempt or conspiracy to commit such a crime is included in this ground. They committed/ committing acts which constitute the essential elements of a violation or conspiracy to violate many laws / regulations in Canada.
The convictions arose not from a single trial or arose from a single scheme of conduct involving moral turpitude but from years long PATERN OF BEHAVIOUR.(evidence).
Those individuals engaged in criminal activities on behalf of Criminal Corporation (Apotex) FOR MANY YEARS AND THEY MUST BE STOPED!
I know /have reason to believe that those individuals are known assisters, abettors, conspirators, colluders with others in the illicit acts to torture, discriminate, denie medical help to me / a disabled person.
It is submitted , that Apotex / Counsel, Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) as well as Ms. K. Koos (Apotex) should be prevented from abuse and obstruction of ALL adjudicative processes and from making any frivolous, vexatious , trivial , made in bad faith suggestions with out any merit / scientific / legal bases further tormenting/ torturing me /a victim. Thos individuals should be charged with Contempt of all Administrative Boards, Commissions, Tribunals processes etc.
Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. K. Koos (Apotex) falsified all records provided by them to all Government Agencies and engaged others / employees in criminal conspiracy (documented) which untimely further deteriorated(s) my state of health.
Those individuals purposely are omitting very critical evidence and medical conditions (or are reducing it in to insignificance).
For many years those individuals were committing crimes against me / a victim by falsifying/ concealing evidence / Documents, soliciting criminal witnesses etc.
Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. K. Koos (Apotex) got engaged in intentional malicious conduct on behalf of Criminal Corporation violating all statutes with a reckless indifference. They acted in the face of a perceived risk that their actions will violate all laws, torture and destroy / kill suffering, sick person.
They perpetuated TORTURE, TORMENT, RETRIBUTION, DISCRIMINATION and HERRASMENT etc.
Mr. Carl Peterson, (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. Koos did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Tribunal and other Government Agencies, in the process DENIED MEDICAL HELP as well as obstructed Canadian Constitution, Legal System etc.
Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. Koos (Apotex) committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury, criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did contribute to my permanent disability, irreparable damage. Issues and/or events which occurred after my departure from Employer are also in full are Apotex’s (Mr. Peterson’s -Company’s Counsel and Ms. Koos as accomplices /executors ) liabilities due to fact that those individuals on behalf of Apotex actively sabotaged legal /administrative proceedings in all Government Agencies in question. Preliminary matters are that Mr. Peterson (Company’s Counsel) and Ms. Koos (Apotex) in premeditated manner are torturing me for MANY, MANY years and pending. They / Company /accomplices act without any consideration for the human rights and my well being despite their awareness of my situation and familiarity with my File.
Apotex is defiant, not regretful, with out remorse, not willing to correct wrong doings.
Mr. Carl Peterson,(Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. K. Koos (Apotex) falsified or concealed all records provided by them to Ontario Labor Board, WSiB, Ontario Human Rights Commission, Tribunal and other Government Agencies (collectively Government) and engaged other people in criminal conspiracy (documented) which untimely further deteriorates my state of health. On behalf of Company they committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury, criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did contribute to permanent disability, irreparable damage.
Those individuals got involved in my Case, purposely were omitting /altering very critical evidence and medical conditions (or were reducing it in to insignificance) and were paid for it while limiting my professional and personal life, making challenging my social life, destroyed my marriage, imposed extreme hardship on my family and relatives/friends and in vicious / malicious manner on on going bases are preventing me from enjoying my Constitutional Right to obtain medical help, be able to provide for myself etc.
In near future I may select to proceed with CIVIL/ CRIMINAL/ LEGAL ACTIOMN AGAINST Mr. Carl Peterson , his Firm (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. K. Koos (Apotex).
Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP):
*Despite his OATH TO HER MAJESTY “JUSTICE” TO SERVE LOYALLY, JUSTIFETLY THOSE IN NEED /JUSTICE SYSTEM, unfortunately he selected to utilize his knowledge / expertise in criminal, amoral, unprincipled manner. He explored /utilized gross deficiencies of the Regulatory System and acted against very sick /disadvantaged / UNREPRESENTED ex-employee of criminal Corporation contributing great deal to my suffer and to my misery for many, many years.
* Mr. Carl Peterson WITH OUT HASITATION COLLECTED HIS HIGH SALLARY, WHILE FOR YEARS DESTROYING SICK / SUFFERING PERSON NOT ABLE TO AFORD MEDICATION , GROCERIES AND ANY THING ELSE AND SPENDING YEARS BEING BEDRIDDEN IN EXCRUCIATING PAIN.
*He could not restrain his bad impulses.
*He prevented me from access to Lawyers, to the legal system, to justice!
*Mr. Carl Peterson did every thing in his capacity to make me unsuccessful in my drive for help and justice despite his awareness of my medical conditions / personal situation and the evidence conforming my allegations.
*Mr. Carl Peterson directly disrespected me twice in the period of my struggle while during Mediation process in Labour Board he abandoned the proceedings and left the Conference Room with out saying any thing (out of the blue he got up and left the proceedings).
*The same behaviour he demonstrated second time around during Mediation at Human Rights Commission living Room with out saying a world (out of the blue he got up and left the proceedings).
*Mr. Carl Peterson wants to participate in judicial process conducted by WSIAT but he is not in position to make any decisions nor he has any authorisations to act on behalf of the Company to mediate any thing ( he did not forward any documents supporting his powers accept Participation Authorisation). The same situation was every were else.
*Appears, that Mr. Carl Peterson wants yet again to derail this time around WSIAT’S PROCES.
*This is fundamentally undemocratic and not acceptable!
Legal profession changed very negatively in Canada.
It becomes a business interested in making profit not making judgments based on merits.
*Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) becomes enabler for Apotex! He manipulated system/ Government Agencies in order to torture, torment, deny of all civil/ constitutional rights, medical help to a disabled person etc.
*“EVERY LAWYER IS GOING TO GO IN TO THE OFFICE TODAY AND COMMIT FROUD”- A TOP LEGAL SCHOLAR AND EX-BAY STREET LAWYER PHILIP SLAYTON TALKS ABOUT HOW LAWYERS BECOME GREADY, UNPRINCIPLED ENABLERS OF THE RICH - THE CORRUPTION OF THIS PROFESSION . “LAWYERS ARE RATS!”
Ms. K. Koos (Apotex):
• Despite numerous letters from WSiB demanding Safety Data from Employer, Ms. K. Koos for many months stagnated process claiming, that SHE MUST PREPARE /fabricate THEM (SHE DID SORTE OUT WHAT WAS IN SUPPORT OF MY CLAIM) and provided selective / bias info.
• Ms. K. Koos obtain “list of products” that I was exposed to (?) from dysfunctional employee who during his employment created an accident at work place and he become a victim of it. Later on he become Apotex’s “safety” rep. and a criminally motivated “witness”.
• She miss represented herself claiming , that she did on regular bases meet with me to discuss safety issues and to do some safety quizzes while the truth are that she started her employment with Apotex 3 (three) years after I was criminally terminated.
• Ms. K. Koos Provided number of quizzes to WSiB , which she claimed that I did complete during employment , while in fact all of them were completed by me in one / first day of my employment in 1997.
• Ms. K. Koos altered my personal / Company’s medical records withholding / canceling all Records indicating my medical problems during my employment
• Ms. K. Koos cancels Company’s Record indicating , that I was perfectly healthy before my employment with Apotex
• She removed Company’s Records generated by Health and Safety Clinic recording fact that I never was issued any mask / protective equipment,
• She counseled record, that Company was under construction during my 6,5 years of employment and all equipment / systems were invalidated/ not functional and buildings were substantially demolished with piles of debris constantly present in Manufacturing /Packaging areas during processes.
• She concealed fact that during my employment Company did not have a Nurse on the stuff NOR OFFICIALY ORGANIZED SAFETY DEPARTMENT.
• Ms. K. Koos CONSEALED FACT , THAT VERY MANY EMPLOYEES SUFERRED DEADLY MEDICAL PROBLEMS AS RESULT OF / FROM UNPROTECTED EXPOSURES TO VERY POTENT ACTIVES
• She did not disclose that most Apotex’s employees from my period of employment were temporary and are not employed any more.
• She did not admit as Company’s Record show, that I worked with out any management, with out any in process quality control, on night shifts and that all my allegations are cross referenced by evidence.
• Etc., etc., etc.
Please include into my File additional medical condition MALICIOUSLY and in BAD FAITH, by means of fraud, deception , intentional deceit, perfidy omitted by all involved in my Case including Apotex’s Counsel Mr. Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP -who argues a legal position that he knows to be false – a Counsel who uses language and criminally twisted reasoning/ methodology which are deliberately misleading in order to deny my claim. Counsel, who is not willing /able to sincerely endorse the principles of justice), most Doctors, a CRIMINAL WSiB and all Government Agencies involved in my Case.
In law, there are inconsistent definitions of bad faith, with one definition much more broad than used in other fields. Black’s Law Dictionary equates fraud with bad faith. But one goes to jail for fraud, and not necessarily for bad faith. The Duhaime online law dictionary similarly defines bad faith broadly as “intent to deceive”, and “a person who intentionally tries to deceive or mislead another in order to gain some advantage”. A Canadian labor arbitrator wrote, in one case, that bad faith is related to rationality in reasoning, as it is used in other fields, but is ill defined in the law.
The concept of bad faith is likely not capable of precise calibration and certainly has not been defined in the same way by all adjudicators. At its core, bad faith implies malice or ill will. A decision made in bad faith is grounded, not on a rational connection between the circumstances and the outcome, but on antipathy toward the individual for non-rational reasons… The absence of a rational basis for the decision implies that factors other than those relevant were considered. In that sense, a decision in bad faith is also arbitrary. These comments are not intended to put to rest the debate over the definition of bad faith. Rather, it is to point out that bad faith, which has its core in malice and ill will, at least touches, if not wholly embraces, the related concepts of unreasonableness, discrimination and arbitrariness.
What was called “Canada’s best judicial definition of ‘bad faith’” by Duhaime’s Legal Dictionary is similarly more consistent with use in other fields.
Good faith and its opposite, bad faith, imports a subjective state of mind, the former motivated by honesty of purpose and the latter by ill-will.
Duhaime also refers to another description, “…bad faith refers to a subjective state of mind… motivated by ill will … or even sinister purposes.”
Punitive and exemplary damages
Courts can award punitive or exemplary damages, over and above the claim, against any Corporation / individual or/and insurance company which is found to have adjusted a claim in bad faith; the damages may be awarded with the aim of deterring such behavior among insurers in general, and may far exceed the amount of the damage due under the insurance policy. In Canada, one case of this type resulted in a record punitive award of $1 million CAD when an insurance company pressed a claim for arson even after its own experts and adjusters had come to the conclusion that the fire was accidental; the company was advised by legal council that the desperate insured parties would be willing to settle for much less than what they were owed.
IN MY CASE, Mr.Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. Koos (Apotex) did knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious and fraudulent statements and representation in a matter within the jurisdiction of the Ontario Labor Board, WSiB (Workers Compensation Insurance Board), Ontario Human Rights Commission /Tribunal, obstructed Ontario Health Act, Ontario Labor Law as well as Canadian Constitution etc.
IN MY CASE, Mr.Carl Peterson (Filion Wakely Thorup Angeletti LLP) and Ms. Koos (Apotex) committed many counts of perverting the course of justice or intending to pervert the course of justice, many counts of perjury, criminal conspiracy, criminal negligence, criminal recruitment of false witnesses, attempted murder, did cause /contribute to permanent disability, irreparable damage.
Company and all involved in sabotaging of my allegations must be INDICTED and convicted on multiple offences / crimes (Criminal Code, Constitutional provisions, Bill – 45, Bill 107, Bill – 168 and other Law provisions).
Best Regards,
(Apotex’s victim)
Andrew
Dear Sir / Madam,
When injustice becomes the rule of law…disobedience becomes a duty.
In other words…injustice breeds contempt.
Regards,
Apotex’s/ WSiB’s victim
Andrew
DESPITE MY REQUESTS, NON OF GOVERNMENT AGENCIES IN ONTARIO DEALING WITH MY CASE DID REPORT any of THOSE CRIMES TO POLICE , FBI, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT, MINISTRY OF PUBLIC SAFETY, US JUSTICE DEPARTMENT etc.
WHY? CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY ?
Andrew
Dear Sir / Madam,
In Ontario we do have a grate program called Crime Stopper (triparte partnership between police, community and media to collect information to help solve crime).
Crime Stoppers is a civilian, non profit, charitable organization that brings together in a triparte relationship, the police services of a community, the media and the community in the fight against crime.
Crime Stoppers provide citizens with a vehicle to supply the police with information about a crime or potential crime of which they have knowledge.
Because Ontario is so focused on elimination of crime, we do have also ONTARIO ASSOCIATION OF CRIME STOPPERS as well as full commitment of Ontario’s Government / Office of the Attorney General.
Criminal Code was amended to be more reliable / flexible / easy to apply etc.
Despite of this, key Government Agencies (listed in my previous Letters) REFUSED TO REPORT CRIMES AGAINST ME / GENERAL PUBLIC / HUMANITY TO POLICE.
THOSE INSTITUTIONS / AGENCIES DID NOT ASK ME WHAT I AM TALKING ABOUT, BECAUSE ALL ALLEGATIONS WERE / ARE SUPPORTED BY HARD EVIDENCE.
On my request Ontario’s Workers Compensation and Insurance Board informed me in writing, that this is not their job to report this / any crimes to Police, BUT THEY DID ALLOW Apotex’s Counsel unrestricted access to my File and to purge them out of hard evidence.!!!!!!!!!
ORIGINALLY WSiB APPROVED MY CLAIM ALL READY ON NOV 14 / 2007, BUT DUE TO APOTEX’s /Counsel ’s criminal conspiracy /acts they stopped processing it and eventually denied it years later.
Also on my request Ontario’s Human Rights Tribunal informed me in writing, that this is not their job to report this /any crimes to Police, BUT THEY ALSO DID ALLOW Apotex’s Counsel unrestricted access to my File and to purge them out of hard evidence.!!!!!!!.
WHAT IT IS GOING ON?
Who is responsible?
ARE THOSE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE ACCOMPLICES, COLLABORATORS, PARTNERS, FACILITATORS, CRIMINALS in Domestic / Global Terrorism, Crimes against General Public / HUMANITY, in Torture , obstruction of Criminal Code, CHARTER of Human Rights, Constitution, Labour Act etc., etc., etc.?
Regards,
Apotex’s / WSiB’s / Government’s of Ontario victim