2012-03-28 - Defendant Alnaz Jiwa Offers to Double-Pay his 96 books to end the Reference for ProfitsPosted April 9th, 2012 by heritage
Extract from attached letter to the Referee by Mr Jiwa:
On July 18th, 2011, the defendants replied to the Requisition and statement of issues served by the Plaintiff's Counsel in March.
Although the Plaintiff party has implied that they want the proceedings to end, the Plaintiff's counsel is continually showering the defendants with proceedings. They continue to insist for a private discovery apart from the reference that was ordered.
The latest occurrence in the Copyright Lawsuit is that a Jamati Member who has never met the Defendants volunteered as his brotherly duty to pay the $30,000 that was demanded in the Plaintiff''s submissions and that was accordingly ordered by the judge.
Mr Chatur wrote to the Imam: "I am making this payment from my own personal funds, and on behalf of my two spiritual brothers, out of love, brotherhood and affection. I do not know Alnaz Jiwa or Nagib Tajdin personally nor have I ever met them. I shall look forward to meeting them."
On June 16th 2011, The Defendants filed, in the Federal Court of Appeal of Canada, the Memorandum of Fact and Law for the Appeal against the Summary Judgment.
Inexplicably, on June 14th, immediately after the defendants served him with the document, the Plaintiff's Lawyer, Mr Gray, leaked the information to a newspaper dedicated to demeaning the defendants, two days before it was filed in court.
The following was written by Mahebub Chatur:
27th May 2011
President Amin Mawji and Mukhi Saheb Alnashir Rehmu (West London)
Shia Imami Ismaili council for UK
London SW7 By email and hand
Dear President Saheb and Mukhi Saheb,
On April 4, 2011, a Motion for Stay had been filed by Defendants
2011-04-21 Defendants file Motion for Stay of the Order
See the article linked above.
On May 3, 2011, the Plaintiff's Counsel filed a response to the Stay motion.
2011-05-03 Plaintiff's Response to the Stay Motion
- It contained no new affidavit
- It attempted to portray the Appeal as frivolous
Context for this motion
The final order is quite broad and involves accounting and document disclosure that may be lengthy.
This final order is being appealed by the defendants.
The Plaintiff's counsel is insisting on applying the order without awaiting the appeal resolution.
Defendants therefore filed a motion to stay the Order pending the Appeal of the Summary Judgment.
The Motion for Stay of the Order, Pending Appeal
On April 21, 2011, the defendants filed one motion to Stay the Order pending Appeal with:
On March 29, Plaintiff's counsel sent a Requisition to the Federal court in order to proceed with the fulfillment of the Summary Judgment Order, in particular the Reference discovery.
Even though an appeal is in process, and the order may get overturned, the Plaintiff's counsel is insisting on proceeding with lengthy procedures to find out who bought books.
On April 11, upon submitting a motion, and with the consent of all parties, it was ordered that the Defendants may amend the Notice of Appeal, and also consolidate their two appeals.
On April 13, Tajdin filed an amended notice of Appeal. The amendments are 6 additional paragraphs added to deal with additional causes of appeal that came up once the Final Order was issued.
MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL
On Feb 14, 2011, Plaintiff's counsel filed a motion to dismiss the Appeal filed by Tajdin and Jiwa on Feb 7 in response to the Reasons for Judgment delivered on January 7, 2011.
Canadian Law provides for the right to Appeal for everyone.
Plaintiff's counsel claimed that this Appeal is premature and should be dismissed because the Judgment did not contain a final order.
On February 8, 2011, After refusing to discuss any of the terms of the proposed Order, The 'Plaintiff' filed a Motion for Judgment. This means that the parties will not agree to a draft of an order, and want the Judge to draft the Order.
REPLY by Defendants
If left unchanged, Gray's draft order paves the path to prolonged additional discoveries and witch-hunts of any person, who, like the Defendant Jiwa, had only given a few copies of the Golden Edition to some family or friends, and it allows SS to continue suing Murids of the Imam in Imam's name for "loss of profits" and "damages", which is obviously against Imam's wish.
As a result,Tajdin and Jiwa both filed Notices of Appeal on Monday February 7, 2011.
Dignified Consent Judgment refused to Defendants - Appeal filed! - Aga Khan Copyright Lawsuit -2011-02-08Posted February 8th, 2011 by heritage
The Aga Khan Copyright judgment in January was the first Intellectual Property judgment of 2011. Attempts were made by defendants to bring back to the table the ideas put forth by the Imam in October 2010.
Defendants were told categorically by Gray that their input about aligning his drafted Order with what the Aga Khan said on October 15th was not welcome, no discussion would happen, and that they could make any comments to the Judge Himself.
Professor David Vaver is a member of IP Osgoode, a Professor at Osgoode Hall Law School, an Emeritus Professor at the University of Oxford, an Emeritus Fellow of St. Peter’s College at Oxford and former Director of the Oxford Intellectual Property Research Centre.
Proof of consent - The Judge erred in Aga Khan Copyright Case, says Oxford Professor and IP expert - 2011-01-31Posted February 1st, 2011 by heritage
Who Must Show Consent in an Intellectual Property Infringement Case? Is the question asked by Oxford Professor and Intellectual Property Expert David Vaver.
A purported Talika is being read out JK's around the world Tonight:
- With reference to Summary Judgment
- With strong language resembling Sachedina's , but not resembling any previous Talika of the Imam.
- With wordings of the January 24, 2010 Letter purportedly by Hazar Imam (Recall that questioned letter where it is said that His signature, which had remained steady for decades had now become very tentative and distorted because of old age and an old healed injury.)
Defendants Nagib Tajdin and Alnaz Jiwa have been continuously attacked and assaulted since the beginning of the Lawsuit.
Verbal and printed attacks against the defendants in Public and in Jamatkhanas are well-known. Reports of physical attacks are now coming to light.
Again, these attacks go against all of Hazar Imam's teachings. In light of the stand of the Imam during the Discovery in October 2010, there is no valid reason for these senseless attacks to continue.
The Hearing for the Plaintiff's and the Defendants' Summary Judgment Motions was Held in Toronto On December 7 & 8.
Here is the entry in the Court Docket:
BEFORE The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington
Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 20 on behalf of Defendant (Jiwa)
Result of Hearing: Matter reserved
Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 28 on behalf of Defendant (Tajdin)
Result of Hearing: Matter reserved