Lawsuit: Adjourned Canadian Union v. Vanquish_ap [2021] FCR 74

oviy4n

oviy4n

Citizen
Supporter
oviy4n
oviy4n
attorney
Joined
Feb 21, 2021
Messages
124
IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
CIVIL ACTION


Canadian Union (tekkovvs Representing)
Plaintiff

v.

Vanquish_AP
Defendant

COMPLAINT
The Plaintiff complains against the Defendant as follows:

I. PARTIES
1. Tekkovvs
2. Vanquish_AP
3. Huney69
4. LilDigiVert

II. FACTS
1. The defendant stated on the public stage that "The Canadians came here a while back, and ever since they have caused chaos and harm for our nation. We need them out !" (Open for interpretation)
2. The defendant has stated her views on Canadians and raccoons alike in the past and showed the same hatred as earlier today. Proof of this is attached when she vehemently opposed the petition which I posted earlier.
3. The defendant brutally murdered both me and huney69 with a bow and arrow, due to our race. Me because I was Canadian, and huney69 because he was a raccoon.

III. CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
1. As an insult to injury, the defendant also said the statements mentioned previously during an unofficial press conference, speaking on stage in the press room.
2. The defendant has also stated that if given the option, she would do it again. (Open for interpretation)

IV. PRAYER FOR RELIEF
1. Due to the extreme emotional and physical damages sustained during this period of abuse and harassment, the plaintiff is requesting $20000 from the defendant. $10000 per affected party.
3. We also request a formal apology in a professional capacity on behalf of the Vice President for the incidents which occurred today.
2. Furthermore, the plaintiff asks the Department of Justice to investigate the two homicides which occurred.

Witnesses:
1. Everyone who was on the stage
2. huney69 (In an official capacity of Press Advisor)
3. Dwerpy

1624312433653.png

1625166699694.png

1624328899669.png


By making this submission, I agree I understand the penalties of lying in court and the fact that I am subject to perjury should I knowingly make a false statement in court.

DATED: The 21st day of June, 2021
 
Last edited:

PwFVDhr.png



IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
WRIT OF SUMMONS

The defendant is required to appear before the court in the case of the Canadian Union v. Vanquish_AP. Failure to appear within 48 hours of this summons will result in a default judgment in favour of the plaintiff.

I'd also like to remind both parties to be aware of the Court Rules and Procedures.
​
 
I will be representing Vanquish_AP in this case on behalf of YZY Legal. Before presenting evidence and legal arguments, the defendant would like to request an in-game trial from the plaintiff and honorable judge.

1624383487957.png
 
Does, the plaintiff also want an in-game trial?
 
Sorry, for my tardiness, I had exams. Could either side give the court a date and a time by which they would be available for an in-game trial?
 
The defendant requests 7PM EST on Monday, July 12th.
 
The plaintiff also requests the time of 7PM EST on Monday, July 12th.
 
Courts.png

IN THE COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
In-Game Trial Briefing

As per the in-game trial process, a briefing of what occurred in-game is to be made with the verdict.

This case occurred in a voice-chat format, which made it a bit more difficult than usual to ensure that everything is noted.

Opening Remarks​
Plaintiff:
  • The Defendant was speaking "mad crazy" on Canadians. The Plaintiff alleges that they feel like a "second class citizen" and that during a Press Conference, the Defendant made many untruthful and slanderous remarks about Canadians, including that "Canadians steal our women."
  • When asked by the Judge as to what right the Defendant broke, the Plaintiff cited section 13 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Defendant:
  • The Defendant's counsel was initially interrupted in their opening statement, with a phone notification, in which the Defendant stated "my lawyer has hoes."
  • The Defendant alleges that the remarks were made in an unofficial capacity, and that there is no corroborating evidence or witnesses to verify what was said in a voice-channel.
  • The Defendant would like to counter-sue the Plaintiff for slander, claiming that the allegations against them in this case were outrageously false. The Defendant then proceeded to present evidence of the Plaintiff agreeing the lawsuit with a "kinda yeah" response to a question regarding the purpose of the case is "to taint the name of our Vice President."
    • The Defendant believes that all sorts of nationalities have now been misinformed by this lawsuit, causing damage to her reputation.
    • The claim for relief in their counter-suit is that they seek a public apology, $666, and 37 cakes, from the Plaintiff.
Notes
  • The Judge dismissed the counter-suit by the Defendant. He does not believe that they have presented a strong case of evidence, and that the claim for relief by the Defendant in the counter-suit was frivolous.​
  • The Defendant proceeded to speak out of turn on occasion, including mention that "This is rigged" and also brandished a weapon during the case.​
  • The Plaintiff had brought Pugbandit as a witness to the stand to testify against the Defendant.​
    • Pugbandit testified that the Defendant had a pattern of attacking marginalized groups, including discrimination against Europeans.​
    • The Defendant's counsel objected to the witness's testimony, and that he has personal bias against the Defendant. In addition, they allege that the witness's testimony is irrelevant with no evidence.​
    • The witness proceeded to attempt to object to the Defendant's objections, and then the Judge asked him to return to the viewing area. The witness said that "the judicary is making me cry" and was eventually escorted out of the witness stand.​
  • The Plaintiff had brought an additional co-counsel huney69, to corroborate his claims of what occurred during the press conference. The Defendant proceeded to attempt to discredit huney69's claims, in which he had presented evidence of questionable behaviour, including huney69 talking about running over raccoons.​
    • The Plaintiff's co-counsel huney69 claimed he was dyslexic and those remarks were taken out of context. the Defendant blurted out that he should show his medical records. The Judge asked if he was "legally blind".​
    • The Defendant's counsel claimed that huney69's disabilities could have also hindered him during the press conference, citing he was not a reliable witness to the incident.​
    • The Plaintiff claimed that the Defendant had been putting huney69 on trial when he was not.​
  • Pugbandit presented evidence of the Defendant's counsel, LilDigiVert, who stated "good keep those dirty migrants out" to convey that both the Defendant and her counsel have a pattern of discrimination.​
  • The Defendant called Krix as a witness to testify against the Plaintiff.​
    • Krix said that "Speaking as a european I am disgraced about what you [The Plaintiff] have done to the honorable Vice President" and claimed "This is obviously a scheme to get money from the Vice President."​
    • Krix stated that the evidence behind the claims was that he "wrote the law on slander" and when told to stay in order, he made the remark that "You owe me one MilkCrack"​
    • The Plaintiff claimed that he was not genuine about his testimony and that he "has a grudge" against the Plaintiff.​
    • The Judge found Krix in contempt after calling the Defendant "a terrorist."​
    • The Defendant's counsel claimed that their witness, Krix, was perfectly fine, as "The Plaintiff's witness called my client a witch"​
  • Both parties proceeded to speak over each other for several minutes, which were inaudible and unclear to fully note, throughout the case.​
  • Closing statements were heard to reiterate everything.​
  • The Judged ruled in favour of the Defendant. (To be noted later by the respective presiding Judge)​

This was the official notes to Case No. 06-2021-21.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Verdict


IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF REDMONT
VERDICT

Case No. 06-2021-21


I. PLAINTIFF’S POSITION
1. The Plaintiff(s), (The Canadian union) states in their complaint that Vanquish_AP(the Vice-President) spoke badly about Canadians and raccoons in an unofficial press announcement
2. The Plaintiff(s), claims in their opening statements of the in-game trial, that raccoons and Canadians are protected under the XIII provision of the rights and freedoms chart:
Every citizen is equal before and under the law and has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law without unfair discrimination and, in particular, without unfair discrimination based on political belief or social status.
3. The Plaintiff(s), also claims that the racoon and the Canadian union suffered emotional and physical damages totalling up to 10,000$ each.


II. DEFENDANTS POSITION
1. The defence, claims that there is no corroborating evidence to support the claim that, vanquish spoke negatively about Canadians and raccoons.
2. Secondly, the defence also says that even if vanquish claimed that, she wouldn't be liable for any damages suffered by the plaintiffs as free speech is protected under the law.
3. Finally the defence said that the lawsuit was slanderous and frivolous.

III. THE COURT OPINION
It is the opinion of the court that, the defendant is not liable for any damages the Canadian union has suffered as freedom of political speech is protected under the law. Secondly, the court also believes that damages were not adequately proven to grand relief on. As for the allegations that the plaintiffs, lawsuit was slanderous and frivolous. The court finds that the defence has not presented enough evidence for a counter-suit.

IV. DECISION
The court hereby declares the defence not liable for the potential damages.

In addition to this, the following people are held in contempt, and the justice department is asked to fine these people appropriately:
Krix

This case is hereby adjourned.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top