Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

COVID-19

700+ jab-free Canadians join class-action suit against Trudeau gov’t over COVID mandates

Published

8 minute read

From LifeSite

By Anthony Murdoch

The lawsuit claims that the federal government openly discriminated against those who chose not to get the shots, notably ‘on the grounds of genetic characteristics and religion.’

Over 700 vaccine-free Canadians negatively affected by federal COVID jab dictates have banded together to file a multimillion-dollar class-action lawsuit against the federal government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

On September 22, Alberta constitutional lawyer Leighton Grey of Grey Wowk Spencer LLP, a firm that has helped the jab free many times in legal cases, filed the lawsuit on behalf of the plaintiffs in federal court.

The lawsuit specifically names Canada’s Attorney General as well as His Majesty the King in Right of Canada as defendants. Overall, the lawsuit claims that the Trudeau feds openly discriminated against Canadians who chose not to get the jabs, notably “on the grounds of genetic characteristics and religion.”

“The Plaintiffs plead that the Defendants (the federal government) committed the tort of misfeasance in public office by deliberately conducting themselves unlawfully in the exercise of their public functions,” the lawsuit reads.

“The Defendants knowingly and in bad faith acted unlawfully outside the scope of their authority by implementing and maintaining the Interim Orders (Trudeau’s COVID dictates).”

The lawsuit alleges that the federal government violated a multitude of the plaintiffs’ charter rights as well as rights under the Canadian Human Rights Act.

Overall, the lawsuit focuses on three areas in which the plaintiffs were affected. They are people who were fired for not getting the shots due to government mandates, those who could not travel in any manner due to Trudeau’s ban on the vaccine-free from flying, and those who fall into both categories.

Overall, the lawsuit seeks damages per plaintiff of $500,000 for violating charter rights along with damages for mental suffering of $200,000 per person and an additional $200,000 for economic damages.

The class-action lawsuit is open at this time and is still accepting more applicants, who must be jab free and have suffered as a result due to federal COVID dictates.

Grey has requested the lawsuit be held in a federal court in Edmonton, Alberta.

In October 2021, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced unprecedented COVID-19 jab mandates for all federal workers and those in the transportation sector and said the unjabbed will no longer be able to travel by air, boat, or train, both domestically and internationally.

This policy resulted in thousands losing their jobs or being placed on leave for non-compliance.

Trudeau “suspended” the COVID travel vaccine mandates on June 20, 2022. Last October, the Canadian federal government ended all remaining COVID mandates in Canada regarding travel, including masking on planes and trains, COVID testing, and allowing vaccine-free Canadians to no longer be subject to mandatory quarantine.

Lawsuit calls out safety of mRNA COVID shots by claiming feds were ‘negligent’ in pushing jabs

The lawsuit also calls into question the safety of the mRNA COVID shots, claiming the federal government was “negligent in the design, development, testing, licensing, distribution, monitoring, marketing and sale of the COVID-19 vaccines.”

“Implementation of the vaccine mandates by the Defendants was unreasonable as it subjected the Plaintiffs to an objectively unreasonable risk of harm. Such unreasonable conduct that both factually and legally caused the harms suffered by the Plaintiffs,” the lawsuit reads.

The lawsuit also alleges that the federal government violated the Genetic Non-Discrimination Act because of mandating that the vaccine free take PCR COVID testing, which sampled one’s genetic material.

As for the COVID jabs themselves, there is mounting evidence concerning the adverse effects they cause in many who have taken them, including kids.

For example, a recent study done by researchers with Canada-based Correlation Research in the Public Interest found that 17 countries have found a “definite causal link” between peaks in all-cause mortality and the fast rollouts of the COVID shots as well as boosters.

Adverse effects from the first round of COVID shots have resulted in a growing number of Canadians who have filed for financial compensation over alleged injuries from the jabs via Canada’s Vaccine Injury Program (VISP).

Vaccines not ‘mandatory’ in Canada

In Canada, vaccines are not mandatory at the federal level as each province is responsible for its own healthcare delivery. At the provincial level, some provinces such as Ontario and New Brunswick have made certain vaccines (not COVID-19 ones) mandatory via legislation, with a few exceptions, for children to attend public schools.

Lawyers with Canada’s Department of Health wrote in a 1996 Canadian National Report on Immunization that unlike some countries “immunization is not mandatory in Canada.”

“It cannot be made mandatory because of the Canadian Constitution,” the lawyers added.

Grey’s class action lawsuit notes the 1996 Canadian National Report on Immunization report, noting how in Canada mandatory vaccination of any kind has been ruled unconstitutional.

While the federal government, broadly speaking, did not force all Canadians to get the COVID shots, with even Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam saying in June 2020 it would not be mandatory, the reality is rules were put in place that made life for those not getting the injections difficult.

The lawsuit also mentions that on June 2, 2020, Chief Public Health Officer Dr. Theresa Tam announced that COVID vaccination would not be mandatory in Canada.

The class-action lawsuit is the latest in a string of legal action being taken against both governments and companies who imposed COVID mandates on its workers.

Currently, the Canadian group Free to Fly, which is made up of pilots and airline workers who lost their jobs for not complying with COVID vaccine mandates, are in an class-action lawsuit against the federal government over its vaccine mandate for aviation. They are seeking full compensation.

Also, a group of more than 176 active and non-active WestJet employees suing the airline and Canadian federal government over forced COVID jab mandates last fall successfully filed its Statement of Claim against the airline and the government in a federal court.

As for the COVID shots approved for emergency use in Canada, they have been associated with severe side effects such as blood clots, rashes, miscarriages, and even heart attacks in young, healthy men. They also have connections to cell lines derived from aborted babies. As a result of this, many Catholics and other Christians refuse to take them.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Former Australian state premier accused of lying about justification for COVID lockdowns

Published on

Daniel Andrews, Premier of Victoria

From LifeSiteNews

By David James

Monica Smit said she is launching a private criminal prosecution against Daniel Andrews based on ‘new evidence proving they enforced lockdowns without medical advice or evidence.’

The fiercest opponent of the former Victorian premier Daniel Andrews during the COVID crisis was activist Monica Smit. The government responded to her advocacy by arresting her for participating in anti-lockdown protests. When she refused to sign her bail conditions she was made, in effect, a political prisoner for 22 days.  

Smit subsequently won a case against the Victoria Police for illegal imprisonment, setting an important precedent. But in a vicious legal maneuver, the judge ensured that Smit would be punished again. She awarded Smit $4,000 in damages which was less than the amount offered in pre-trial mediation. It meant that, despite her victory, Smit was liable for Victoria Police’s legal costs of $250,000. It was not a good day for Australian justice. 

There is a chance that the tables will be reversed. Smit has announced she is launching a private criminal prosecution against Andrews and his cabinet based on “new evidence proving they enforced lockdowns without medical advice or evidence.”

The revelation that the savage lockdown policies made little sense from a health perspective is hardly a surprise. Very little of what happened made medical sense. For one thing, according to the Worldometer, about four-fifths of the people who tested positive for COVID-19 had no symptoms. Yet for the first time in medical history healthy people were treated as sick.  

The culpability of the Victorian government is nevertheless progressively becoming clearer. It has emerged that the Andrews government did not seek medical advice for its curfew policies, the longest in the Western world. Andrews repeatedly lied when he said at press conferences that he was following heath advice. 

David Davis, leader of the right wing opposition Liberal Party, has made public a document recording an exchange between two senior health officials. It shows that the ban on people leaving their homes after dark was implemented without any formal input from health authorities. 

Davis acquired the email exchange, between Victorian chief health officer Brett Sutton and his deputy Finn Romanes, under a Freedom of Information request. It occurred two-and-a-half hours after the curfew was announced. 

Romanes explained he had been off work for two days and was not aware of any “key conversations and considerations” about the curfew and had not “seen any specific written assessment of the requirement” for one. 

He added: “The idea of a curfew has not arisen from public health advice in the first instance. In this way, the action of issuing a curfew is a mirror to the State of Disaster and is not occurring on public health advice but is a decision taken by Cabinet.” Sutton responded with: “Your assessment is correct as I understand it.” 

The email exchange, compelling evidence of the malfeasance of the Andrews government, raises further questions. If Smit’s lawyers can get Andrews to respond under oath, one ought to be: “If you were lying about following medical advice, then why were you in such a hurry to impose such severe measures and attack dissenters?” 

It remains a puzzle. Why did otherwise inconsequential politicians suddenly turn into dictatorial monsters with no concern for what their constituents thought?  

The most likely explanation is that they were told it was a biowarfare attack and were terrified, ditching health advice and applying military protocols. The mechanism for this was documented in a speech by Queensland senator Malcolm Roberts.  

If so, was an egregious error of judgement. As the Australian Bureau of Statistics showed, 2020 and 2021 had the lowest level of respiratory diseases since records have been kept. There was never a pandemic. 

There needs to be an explanation to the Australian people of why they lost their liberty and basic rights. A private prosecution might achieve this. Smit writes: “Those responsible should face jail time, nothing less. The latest revelation of ‘document 34‘ is just the beginning. A public criminal trial will expose truths beyond our imagination.”

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

Conservatives promise to ban firing of Canadian federal workers based on COVID jab status

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Anthony Murdoch

The Conservative platform also vows that the party will oppose mandatory digital ID systems and a central bank digital currency if elected.

Pierre Poilievre’s Conservative Party’s 2025 election platform includes a promise to “ban” the firing of any federal worker based “solely” on whether or not they chose to get the COVID shots.

On page 23 of the “Canada First – For A Change” plan, which was released on Tuesday, the promise to protect un-jabbed federal workers is mentioned under “Protect Personal Autonomy, Privacy, and Data Security.”

It promises that a Conservative government will “Ban the dismissal of federal workers based solely on COVID vaccine status.”

The Conservative Party also promises to “Oppose any move toward mandatory digital ID systems” as well as “Prohibit the Bank of Canada from developing or implementing a central bank digital currency.”

In October 2021, the Liberal government of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced unprecedented COVID-19 jab mandates for all federal workers and those in the transportation sector. The government also announced that the unjabbed would no longer be able to travel by air, boat, or train, both domestically and internationally.

This policy resulted in thousands losing their jobs or being placed on leave for non-compliance. It also trapped “unvaccinated” Canadians in the country.

COVID jab mandates, which also came from provincial governments with the support of the federal government, split Canadian society. The shots have been linked to a multitude of negative and often severe side effects, such as death, including in children.

Many recent rulings have gone in favor of those who chose not to get the shots and were fired as a result, such as an arbitrator ruling that one of the nation’s leading hospitals in Ontario must compensate 82 healthcare workers terminated after refusing to get the jabs.

Beyond health concerns, many Canadians, especially Catholics, opposed the injections on moral grounds because of their link to fetal cell lines derived from the tissue of aborted babies.

Continue Reading

Trending

X