The Tender For Law

Volume 6

May 20, 2014 4:35 PM

Pete Daoust

SFC Inc, just received a "peremptory inquiry" from CRA !! :-o

PEREMPTORY. Absolute; positive. A final determination to act without hope of renewing or altering. Joined to a substantive, this word is frequently used in law; as peremptory action; F. N. B. 35, 38, 104, 108; peremptory nonsuit; Id. 5, 11; peremptory exception; Bract. lib. 4, c. 20; peremptory undertaking; 3 Chit. Pract. 112, 793; peremptory challenge of jurors, which is the right to challenge without assigning any cause. Inst. 4, 13, 9 Code, 7, 50, 2; Id. 8, 36, 8; Dig. 5, 1, 70 et 73.

They are looking for PERSONAL information about an ex-employee of SFC Inc.

His address, his phone number, his cell number and stuff like that...

The first letter they've sent was only an "INQUIRY", and as the CEO of SFC Inc, I responded:

Please provide us with a written guarantee that we won't stripped this person from his right to PRIVATE LIFE, as the Quebec Charter article 5 says, and we will gladly go to step two with your inquiry.

Step 2 being my hourly rate (which they have no idea at this time).

And now, without responding, they just sent the same inquiry, but this one is a PEREMPTORY inquiry :D

I just don't want SFC Inc, to violate someone's rights.....that is all :(

Read Comments

Will Bed

If that PERSON is an EX EMPLOYEE, CRA must have that PERSON's latest info on file ? If they're looking for that PERSON, why dont they just call their police instead of asking SFC to help them ?

That PERSON is an EX employee. SFC inc doesnt have anything to do what that PERSON anymore, right ? Why would SFC inc even wanna accept a partnership offer from CRA in that matter ?

Pete Daoust

They are reffering to article 126. (14) of the :

Employment Insurance Act

S.C. 1996, c. 23

Requirement to provide documents and information

(14) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, but subject to subsection (15), the Commission may for any purpose relating to the administration or enforcement of this Act, other than Part IV, by notice served personally or by confirmed delivery service, require that any person provide, within such reasonable time as is stated in the notice,

(a) any information or additional information, including any information return or supplementary return; or

(b) any document.

Pete Daoust

But I don't completely get it, :(

(15) The Commission shall not impose on any person, in this section referred to as a �third party�, a requirement under subsection (14) to provide information or any document relating to one or more unnamed persons unless it first obtains the authorization of a judge under subsection (16).

What the fuck is an UNAMED person ? :-o

Pete Daoust

PIERRE DAOUST has no right to spend 1 minutes at SFC Inc, other than for SFC Inc INTEREST... :(

If PIERRE DAOUST needs to spend time for ANY outside duties, SFC Inc have to bill at $3000.00 per hour rate, paid in advance, that's the LAW at SFC Inc. :(

If ever PIERRE DAOUST gets caught not following this rule, he will be find for a sum of $250,000.00 :(

Pete Daoust

Will, when I am on duty for SFC Inc, I AM THE FUCKING PERSON, the fun part is, I GET TO DECIDE WHEN I am the CEO, it could be from 8:00am to 8:10am, or whatever I DECIDE so....that can get a little bit fucked up, for ANYONE who is NOT in my head :D

Will Bed

Actually, I just no longer see myself as THE FUCKIN PERSON... That's why I kinda tripped on that one... Using the right words is important :p and reading back it may seem as if I did think Pete the MAN was the CEO...

When the PERSON is working, I make it work, but I'm not it... I can make a bicycle work, but I'm not a bicycle...

Will Bed

PIERRE DAOUST can ACT in the CAPACITY of CEO. Pierre the MAN is not acting. He's not the CEO. He makes the CEO and PERSON work when he wishes to... I totally understand that and I dont need DC to fuck my mindset...

When I said "So CEO is a CAPACITY for a MAN...?" I actually meant "huhhh WTF since when ???"

Again, my eyes/mind got stuck on your : "As the CEO, my number one DUTY is..." I just have this weird feeling that you tell that to CRA, and all of a sudden they have reasons to believe they have THEIR PERSON ;)

Will Bed

I just read that back... I think I'm getting the source of what caught me up there...

The way you say it, you are Pierre the Man, and you have a PIERRE DAOUST suit you can put on when you wish to, and that suit comes with different pairs of shoes depending on which ground you wish to make PIERRE DAOUST walk/dance on...

I was actually seeing WB THE PERSON more as a tool... Let's take a hammer as an example. I can carry the hammer. I can use it to bang nails, I can also use it to bang other things. I need it to build stuff. But I'm not the hammer. Does that make any sense ?