Robbins SCE Research
Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US & the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Donate
July 2020 No.:5 IRobbins v Cambridge, Glen P. Robbins v LSocietyBC - Sea to Sea Supreme Court Perfidy - Demand to Can Judicial Council for Inquiry v Hinkson CJ, Fenlon J (primary) (2nd) (Davies, Smith, Grauer JJ, Bauman CJ) (3rd) SCC Wagner --Abella, Rot
  Jul 10, 2020

continued from No.: 4
Boss Power, a BC Inc. and friends of BC Liberals and BC NDPers received a settlement valued in current dollars at over $40,000,000 a decade ago. Boss Power was an unproven Uranium Mine, and obtained the ‘insider settlement’ on the basis of a misfiling of an application at BC Government.
An unproven Uranium Mine owned by ‘friends and associates of Elected BC Officials’ overseen by Vancouver law firm Fasken Martineau, Elizabeth Lyall’s (who represented LSBC v Glen P. Robbins), a clear conflict known then to John Horgan, BC’s current Premier, whose fingerprints are all over passively approving the payment (Hansard) which never should have occurred.
The scope and depth of Intent to cause harm are unprecedented.
In the Google submissions of Glen P. Robbins “Read” by Brown J. (Harper, Stephen) of Supreme Court of Canada (S.C.C. 36602) the two prominent criminal activities are (1) The Stay of Execution Order H130330 S.C.C. 35772 (April 7, 2014 H130330) Kloegman J.) & (2) The Order Made After Application filed May 28, 2013 by court fraudsters Bakonyi/Cambridge & Bakonyi/Cambridge/Ellis Roadburg/BMO Bank H130330.
Master Tokarek is a Master of the BC Supreme Court who granted the conduct of sale order December 9, 2013 (watch him retire now lol) and in that legal capacity, he is deemed equivalent to a BC Provincial Court Judge, a BC employee, like SCC Registrar Bilodeau is an employee of the Ontario Provincial Government.
A Master is a Province of BC employee, while a Justice is a federally constitutionally appointed employee. The Prime Ministers Office is ultimately responsible for every Judge appointed to any Canadian Superior Court. The Privy Council threatens to advise the government.
Tokarek drags the Province of British Columbia further into the fraud.
Master Tokarek could apologize and say he was tricked in providing the conduct of sale order December 9, 2013, by the 100% fraudulent Order Made After Application filed May 28, 2013 following the order nisi (foreclosure) - of May 9, 2013.
The Order Made After Application of *(May 28, 2013) is a complete fraud. Concocted. Completely illegal -Criminal property was lost as a result. That’s criminal fraud right out of the Criminal Code recited in exact detail in Google v Equustek SCC (36602) Intervener application of Glen P. Robbins “Read” by Brown J.
Justice Brown of the Supreme Court of Canada has Read the Canadian Criminal Code application “Read” the document. It states so on the SCC Court Docket (36602). The Supreme Court of Canada MUST now be deemed to be “aware” of the massive criminal and civil fraud against Ita Robbins @ 2016. Legal Service is thus made upon the Supreme Court of Canada.
NEWSFLASH -Judicial Review of Justice Grauer’s Reasons for Judgment (S111171) (35302) are the key to easy remedy-Quick Settlement. Nullity on his own Motion. Don’t be slow with the $$.
The Reasons For Judgment of Justice Grauer (Harper, Stephen) (BC Court of Appeal (Trudeau, Justin) Dec 2019 (application 2016 same time as SCC Brown reads the criminal laundry list) (S111171) (S.C.C. 35302), need speedy Judicial Review in Law Society of BC v Glen P. Robbins (S111171) and is another efficient way to quickly fix this entire miscarriage of justice.
Grauer J. should reconsider his Reasons in light of “unique circumstances”. Glen P. Robbins a non lawyer had ‘walloped’’ both LSBC lawyers Elizabeth Lyall and Michael Kleisinger - embarrassing and humiliating them both in the process at Trial Hearing (see S111171) (S.C.C. 35302).
Grauer J. refused (at hearing) their request for vexatious litigant order (September 19, 2011) against Glen P. Robbins.
Fenlon J. H130330 could apologize to Ita and Glen Robbins, do it fast and early and then retire. (GPR says resignation in disgrace).
Chief Justice Hinkson and Michael Kleisinger LSBC then aided and abet Bakonyi/Cambridge and Ellis Roadburg/BMO Bank in their court fraud all in an attempt to help cover up Usury and their abuses of the courts rules, procedures and practices.
They used their Office including superior access to and control of the BC Court process and procedures to circumvent them, clear Abuse of Process(s).
(Hinkson CJ is administratively responsible for “direct opportunity and motive”) including taking over the Grauer J. case (S111171) which was before the Supreme Court of Canada (35302)).
Hinkson CJ should be forced to resign following an investigation of these Complaints. His intentional bad faith conduct -pretending that a BC Civil Rule 8 interlocutory application of LSBC is a Petition to “entrap” Glen P. Robbins into a rushed to judgment for benefit of he and his ‘friends’ is scandalous.
Remember Fenlon J. (Harper, Stephen) pretending to be mystified by Section 15 of the Legal Profession Act (BC). Next, Hinkson CJ (Harper, Stephen) feigns his delusion on filing. Pathetic.
Both of their actions are Abuse(s) of His/Her Office to enable fraud by Law Society members. His motivation (Intent) in other cases involving Glen P Robbins & Ita Robbins is undeniable. Keep in mind what former Supreme Court of Canada Chief Justice Brian Dickson said about miscarriage of justice - ‘it most often occurs in the court processes and procedures’. (GPR says: Cheaters law).
In other words lawyers (and in this case constitutionally appointed Justices - CHEAT the law). It's a long record of Abuse of Power. Glen & Ita Robbins have given them every opportunity to clean the record.
The Court file under Hinkson’s nose (S111171) before he butchers it (the legitimate court case involving Grauer J.),would clearly contain evidence of the appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada from the Grauer J. order under (S111171) (35302), including all of the information relating to that case, the Trial and Court Transcript.
The Reasons for Judgment were right there in the file in front of Hinkson. The two statutes Legal Profession Act and Supreme Court Act are entirely different animals. New Petition thank you.
Hinkson CJ and the Courts know as well that the vexatious and fraudulent litigant action by LSBC using the same file as Grauer J. (S111171) remains an abuse of the BC Court Rules, and a fraud on the court.
Hinkson CJ should be fired immediately, remember what Wagner CJ said about it:
f a Judge has to go he has to go’.
It's put up or shut up time for the apex of Canada’s Judiciary.
It is Glen and Ita Robbins allegation that Hinkson CJ knowingly and with malice aforethought used his Office as Chief Justice to defraud Ita Robbins knowing Ita Robbins property {*(S111171) - H130330} would be taken (GPR’s residence) by fraud.
*On the day Hinkson CJ made Order against Glen P. Robbins for vexatious procedure (litigant) he also knew he was the lawyer involved in the interference of GPR’s BCHRT lawyer John Motiuk and GPR’s lawsuit (2001), and was saving himself from being discovered as the person who ultimately caused Glen P. Robbins - a person with an absolutely clean record to be listed as a pedophile on 1st page Google search engine.
Glen P. Robbins alleges that Hinkson CJ’s conduct - interfering with Glen P. Robbins BCHRT matter in 2000 causing the word “pedophile” to be erroneously linked to his the name and linking sub State actor Global Search Engine to the court fraud current to 2020, was ultimately his own doing.
Hinkson was consciously using his Office as Chief Justice to save himself, even if it meant ruining two ordinary citizens and defrauding them of their assets.
I note (again) Google Head Office is in the State of California, repeating my assertion that the State of California overturned Google v Equustek from the Supreme Court of Canada.
Ita Robbins & Glen P. Robbins Demand Remedy and Compensation (Yesterday)
Ita Robbins should be compensated insofar as her “Offer to Settle” comes up this should include her relative FM in the amount. Glen P. Robbins deems on his own Independent Motion that the word “yesterday” suggests an inference that inherent with these Complaints and frustration over settlement for Ita Robbins is a charge of free speech interest. Turning up the heat on the judicial racket.
The two remaining respondents, “Jane Doe” and “Jane Doe”, are the daughters of Ita Robbins (GPR) and may wish to make their own settlement(s). One daughter was technically an infant under the Infant Act (BC) at the time Bakonyi/Cambridge obtained a fraudulent vacant possession order (April 24, 2014 Smith J.) H130330.
It is necessary to most easily and efficiently 1st produce justice for Glen P. Robbins v Law Society of BC, (S111171) and once instituted, this simple action, based on the facts and merits of the case, will serve as a catalyst under “unique circumstances” to the Supreme Court of Canada (35302), to thereafter remedy EVERY matter in Ita Robbins v Cambridge Mortgage 35772.
(S111171) (35302) Grauer J. subject matter is the Legal Professions Act, specifically Authority to Practice Law. (Hinkson CJ *(S111171) subject matter is the BC Supreme Court Act should have started a new file with a new number.
The Law Society of BC matter (S111171) (SCC 35302) versus Glen P. Robbins involves (only) the Legal Professions Act, specifically Section 15, Authority to Practice Law, and most specifically 15 (1), 15 (4), and 15 (5).
Perversion of justice version *S111171 involving former law partners-Law Societies Kleisinger and Hinkson CJ, in vexatious litigant fraud against Glen P. Robbins, has no relationship to issues involving Grauer J.’s Reasons (S111171)- the latter being an open case at the Supreme Court of Canada S.C.C. (35302) at the time of the Kleisinger/Hinkson court frauds.
Hinkson believes he is above the Supreme Court of Canada like the State of California has proved it is.
In the joint filing submissions of Ita and Glen Robbins to the BC Supreme Court, 800 Smithe St., in crooked Vancouver courthouse BC June 2019, this fact was clearly pointed out to Trial Scheduling Desk/Judges Chambers who once again renewed the fraud again against Ita and Glen Robbins (underscoring the mounting bad faith and renewing any Time Limitations).
Kleisinger and Hinkson CJ use the legitimate case file (S111171) to expedite their fraud on the courts-- (while phony baloney Hinkson CJ crows in the news about the need for more judges) --depicted herein as *(S111171). Hinkson CJ and Michael Kleisinger are acting in Contempt of the Supreme Court of Canada and the Supreme Court of Canada has known this since 2016.
The Province of British Columbia courts (35302), 35772, like the State of California (SCC 36602) courts simply disregards the Supreme Court of Canada. Ita Robbins' matter involves the foreclosure of property H130330 SCC 35772. Glen P. Robbins matter involves the Legal Professions Act and BC Supreme Court Act - - - completely unrelated to Ita Robbins matter (S111171) (35302) *S111171
Mademoiselle Robbins foreclosure matter H130330 is interfered with, when the Law Society of BC, Hinkson CJ & LSBC lawyer Michael Kleisinger’s collude, to abuse process, Abuse of Power and procedure and to intentionally invoke (court abuse - miscarriage of filing procedures) in *S111171 in an overall effort to ‘bury’ the final S.C.C. decision (35302) from the Grauer J. Reasons for Judgment (S111171), prior to the case being officially closed from SCC to obtain a vexatious litigant order against Glen P. Robbins also under *S111171, later used (abused) to close down Ita Robbins appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada H13330 S.C.C. 35772.
Here is the entry from the Supreme Court of Canada docket file No.: (35302) Glen P. Robbins versus Law Society of BC: “2015-07-08 Close file on Leave”
The reader will note that the file from the lower court-- (Law Society of BC v Glen P. Robbins (Grauer J.) (S111171) and granted S.C.C. file No.: (35302))-- that the appeal of the Grauer J. order by Glen P. Robbins is not concluded at the Supreme Court of Canada until July 8th, 2015. How was it that the Kleisinger - Hinkson CJ corruption under *S111171 was able to occur on March 3, 2014, March 21, 2014 April 10, 2014 under the BC Supreme Court Act using the BC Supreme Court processes and registry in Contempt of the Supreme Court of Canada (35302)?
Brown J. of the Supreme Court of Canada can attest of these facts to you, he has knowledge of them. He Read the entire file (36602) including (nearly) every document spoken about herein. Hinkson Chief Justice and Kleisinger LSBC Compliance Officer conspire to effectively make Grauer J. 's Reasons for Judgement a Legal Nullity. By declaring S111171 before Grauer J a Nullity NOW - all the dominos fall $$$$$ please. By doing so they make Supreme Court of Canada 35302 a further legal nullity through their collective contemptuous actions. Hinkson and Kleisinger owing to their mutual corruption remain de facto a superior court of appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada.
I/We will show the Kleisinger - Hinkson CJ illegal manipulation of court processes and powers in corrupted file No.: *S111171 was designed to help cover up massive court fraud (1) At point of BC Supreme Court Registry courthouse, 800 Smithe Street, Vancouver Registry; (2) Within the Court Hearings themselves; (3) Among High Office holders including the Judges including at least 6 Supreme Court of Canada Judges being complained about.
The Complaints to the Canadian Judicial Council & The Courts lie begging retribution for Ita & Glen Robbins.
The Documents filed by Glen P. Robbins in Google v Equustek (36602) were formally “Read” by Supreme Court of Canada Judge Brown. These Documents are prepared as evidence of Crimes committed as a Prosecutor might do. The word “Read” or read in legal parlance embodies the complete understanding that Judge Brown completely read Glen P. Robbins Application - per Ita Robbins v Cambridge Mortgage, and has seen and “Read” every document, read every affidavit relating to the criminal allegations made to Brown J. of the Supreme Court of Canada by Glen & Ita Robbins. An Intervener is an adviser to the Judge. No matter the documents were Read by a Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada (Brown J. S.C.C. 36602).
(Glen P. Robbins calls this legal move his Legal Vimy Ridge Strategy (“LVRS”)). To wit: The Supreme Court of Canada has to be deemed to be fully aware of the criminal activities - fraud on the Courts, and upon Ita Robbins & Glen P. Robbins.
An Intervener application under law is intended ‘to inform’ the presiding Justice by inference a discretion offered to the Justice, in this case Brown J. The Word “Read” in legal history relates to an extended internship - like a practitioner of law. In Canada all Judges at Superior and Supreme Court levels must be lawyers. Judge Brown’s “Read” is linked unequivocally to any person with extensive experience in the practice of law, which would I believe include the lawyer now a Judge.
Premier of British Columbia John Horgan, and Justin Trudeau by virtue of the 172 page legal analysis included herein and submitted to both of them (more up to date (Civil Damages allegation) version of the Google v Equustek matter (S.C.C. 36602), have been ‘Read in’ by both of them. Poorly written Legal Professions Act (BC) and Law Society of British Columbia and its members, members of the Judiciary and the Court implicated caused so much damage, and heart ache for no societal value whatsoever.
Begin Analysis of Grauer J. Reasons for Judgment (S111171) here: Section 15 (5) the Coronavirus (China Virus) infecting both cases Ita Robbins v Cambridge Mortgage & co-case Glen P. Robbins v Law Society of B.C.
BC Supreme Court Justice Christopher Grauer in his Reasons for Judgment October 3, 2011 in Law Society of BC v Glen P. Robbins (S111171) Declared Subsection 15 (5) to be “unclear” and “redundant”, essentially an ‘awful and shitty’ piece of legislation of the LPA ‘that no one could understand and courts refused to deal with’.
15 (5) (Legal Profession Act (BC)) becomes the ‘Corona type legal virus’ used by legal professionals to purposefully cause harm to Ita & Glen Robbins involving both legal cases (S111171) (35302) and H130330 35772. A quick assessment of these subsections of the Legal Profession Act (BC) “LPA” obviously very unclear to the public (and to lawyers and judges) indicates the following from the LPA (BC):
Subsection 15 (1) asserts (with ‘troubling incoherent verbosity’) that ‘any citizen is a lawyer if they choose to be, but only ‘real’ lawyers can collect fees and benefits’.
15 (4) says “no person (who isn’t a real lawyer) can refer to themselves as a lawyer” but doesn’t specify how that reconciles with the (theoretical promise) offered in 15 (1). (I/We are not sure if this is intended as irrational or intentional).
15 (5) the ‘virus in this case’ -15 (5) asserts that: ‘no person shall commence, defend, or prosecute a proceeding in any court in his own name, or the name of another person except as permitted by section 15 (1) (see above) of the Legal Profession Act.’
15 (5) the ‘virus in this case’ -15 (5) asserts that: ‘no person shall commence, defend, or prosecute a proceeding in any court in his own name, or the name of another person except as permitted by section 15 (1) (see above) of the Legal Profession Act.’
These exact words underlined from 15 (5) (the “clumsy” “redundant” words) are then extracted from the subsection in amendments to subsection 15 (5) made by Royal Assent of the British Columbia Legislation in May 2012, with draft legislation initiated in early January 2012, just months after Grauer’s Reasons for Judgment were made public October 3, 2011, and just months after draft submissions, written about in the Vancouver Sun’s Legal Writer Ian Mulgrew (“the Gazette”).
As a (1) regular person, (2) an elected person, (3) a lawyer or a judge or (4) a regular person reading those provisions of 15 (5), the question of (and doubt of) legal competence is obviously provoked.
The competence question occurs in incoherent legislative drafting - essentially actually how Grauer J. describes 15 (5) in his Reasons.
Justice Grauer’s position is that 15 (5)’s incoherence is “ironic” because it happens to be the Legal Profession Act and specifically Section (15) on Authority to Practice law. (lol).
Glen P. Robbins finds it just as ‘ironic’ that 3 BC Supreme Court lawyers & 4 Supreme Court of Canada Judges involved in this massive fraud relating most notably to criminal interest and usury are of Jewish background.
An open minded ordinary person armed with the facts might expect that any Statute governing the Law Society of BC that involved the “Public Interest” (and the public proper), would go to lengths to be more clear rather than incoherent as 15 (5) was before Grauer J. post amendment May 2012 (and remains incoherent today). How can the Law Society of BC virus 15 (5) be permitted to exact so much harm on regular people? Was it planned by the Law Society of BC and Attorney General or just incompetence? It’s one or the other.
To the Judges & to the Ordinary Person ‘Reading’ this: Do these words in 15 (5) as Glen P. Robbins & Grauer J. encountered them make any sense to you?
Would you understand how to apply them to a hypothetical case where you wanted to act as your own lawyer or lawyer for another under 15 (1) of the Legal Profession Act (circa 1996, 2012)? I/We ask this early in this submission because all of the bad things that occur can be traced and tracked like a Coronalegalvirus to 15 (5). It’s very sad. Impeach 15 (5).
When Grauer J.’s Reasons (S111171) are Reviewed by Judges through these Canadian Judicial Council Complaints and/or Supreme Court of Canada applications, and his order against GPR relating to section 15 (5) is struck as it should be, then it is only a matter of quick judicial orders ‘all round’, to correct the disasters occurring in Ita Robbins v Cambridge H130330 35772 & Glen P. Robbins v Law Society of BC,(S111171) (35302)...
If it's an honest mistake a Judge has made- then just say sorry - and doing so will force the domino of corrections essential to the most efficient way forward to correct the horrific events occurring and make Ita Robbins whole again. There is provision in law for a Judge to say sorry without being personally liable for that apology.
As a judge, an important cog in the hierarchy of the machinery of the State - wouldn’t you want these unique circumstances addressed and for justice to occur? What’s holding everyone up? Are Canadian judges under the direction of some other faceless power the public doesn’t see or isn’t aware of? Is that why (z)Bakonyi, (z)Kleisinger & (z) Ellis Roadburg are free to get away with it?
Hinkson CJ moves from BC Court of Appeal to BC Supreme Court to interfere with Grauer J. 's Reasons for Judgement because he and the Law Society of BC know there are problems with the reasoning that will kick out 15 (5) and force an avalanche of order revisions.
One can see that some aspects of Grauer J. 's Reasons are sufficiently inconsistent anyhow, to support an Order for an extension of time Today from New Application to the SCC (35302). Permitting Glen P. Robbins on the basis of unique circumstances to provide a full appeal of Grauer J.’s Reasons with a laser like focus and scrutiny of his Reasons insofar as 15 (5) is another efficient and effective way to begin to solve this legal/judicial malfeasance.
LPA provisions under 15 (5) make no sense in 1996, 2012 or 2020.
None of the Section 15 LPA makes any sense to begin with, there was little case law relating to 15 (5) because justices stayed away from it. It is ‘very stupid law’ intended as defence mechanism for the Law Society to bar a growing legion of self litigants (“pro se”) who either lack the resources for a lawyer or like Glen & Ita Robbins have had multiple misadventures with lawyers often overpaid and less than competent.
15 (5) was 1st made law in 1996. 15 (5) made no sense in (1996), made no sense after it was amended by the BC Legislature (2012) and makes no sense today. How would the Interpretation Act be applied to law that a BC Justice has declared to be “unclear” or “redundant” to other subsections of that Section of the LPA? (lol).
That the LSBC wanted more control can be proved by the number of unsuspecting ‘non lawyers’ LSBC Kleisinger has prosecuted with ‘garbage law’ = 15 (5).
Glen P. Robbins v Law Society of BC (SCC 35302) is the only legal case of its kind marking a time in Canadian jurisprudence history where it can be shown without doubt or dispute that a non lawyer, a Canadian with no formal legal education defeated and exposed the entire legal system in from Vancouver (Victoria), British Columbia to Ottawa, Canada as a fraud known to them all.
A Quick Suggestion of Civil Damage Settlement as part of the Opportunity of Governments to a cessation of further damages.
Assessment of punitive damages should be at least 5 times the total of all other heads of damages considered.
The $2 Million property Specific Loss Claim made by Ita Robbins (inclusive of house and contents) (“the illegal home invasion”), is not included in the multiple of 5 in this Without Prejudice “Offer to Settle”, though Ita Robbins believes that it should be included in any multiple as is evident from the analysis provided in the previous Offers to Settle.
Ita Robbins also claims the unique status of seeking a *$1 million pain and suffering award and is willing to accept an asterisk beside that amount.
The current Supreme Court of Canada ceiling of $500,000 is obviously Medieval, and appears, particularly in context of what occurs in Ita Robbins v Cambridge Mortgage (S.C.C. 35772), to be too little. (Likely a calculation that went into the Law Societies and Judges fraud) along with the absence of challenges one might have expected to Judicial Immunity.
The aforementioned punitive damages multiple is seen as high as 15 times in State of California Civil cases.
The Supreme Court of Canada (in a Florida State case applied to Ontario courts) “Beals v Saldanha” {2003} 3 R.C.S. 72, involving judicial comity between our top court, and the Florida civil court, uses a multiple much higher than that (40 times damages), a multiple which former Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin Supreme Court of Canada asserts ‘is not offensive to Canadian sensibilities’.
Pain and suffering ceilings are something less than fair at $500,000.
Punitive Damages are intended to punish ‘guilty’ parties and provide retribution in dollars to the damages party. In cases involving alleged criminality where knowledge and awareness existed among the culpable parties, and where no action was taken in Mitigation by the ‘guilty’ party, higher damages, specifically Punitive Damages, are warranted.
Glen P. Robbins Intervener Application to the Supreme Court of Canada “Read” by Justice Brown in Google v Equustek (36602) occurs in 2016 and was the 1st time that the Supreme Court of Canada can be shown to be fully aware of the crimes occurring in the Vancouver courts “H130330 *(S111171)”.
Fast forward - recently published Letters to and from current BC Supreme Court Assistant Chief Justice Heather Holmes 2019 (Special Counsel represents her Office) - a Judge with a long history in criminal law - has received pertinent documents including the 172 page “Binder” of legal analysis provided to those necessary to effect the change (Spring/Summer 2019).
Heather Holmes, Assistant Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of British Columbia like Judge Brown of the Supreme Court of Canada, may now also be deemed to be legally aware.
These Records can be obtained from the Supreme Court of Canada Records along with Records for Ita Robbins v Cambridge 35772 H130330 & Glen P. Robbins v Law Society of BC (35302) (S111171). (Persons in High Office Elected or otherwise, can obtain them for free, a consideration which Ita & Glen Robbins assert should extend to the greater Public).
The BC Supreme Court dockets provided (S111171) + H130330 are ‘riddled’ with crime and corruption are available at BC Court Services Online. The “Reader” can plainly see how easily these facts are affirmed. (Two smart law school students could achieve full awareness of the criminal activity in one half day of work).

Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US and the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Site Map
Copyright Robbins SCE Research Inc. ©2020