From The Desk of John Richardson: Co-chair – Responding to the Government Delay

Dear Supporters:

This post is to provide an update on your FATCA lawsuit against the Government of Canada.

As you are aware, the Government of Canada has significantly slowed the pace of the lawsuit by claiming that it needs to consider the relevance of over 100,000 “FATCA related documents”. Whether true or not, the large number of documents that they have identified as “potentially relevant” means that:

1. Government lawyers must consider those documents and determine their relevance; and

2. The ADCS lawyers must then review those same documents.

The effect of this is delay, delay and more delay.

“Justice delayed is justice denied!”

What will ADCS do about this?

We have made the decision to:

Instruct Mr. Arvay to begin a legal proceeding in Federal Court to prevent the government from disclosing the banking information that it will be collecting from the banks to the U.S. government. Mr. Arvay’s position is that if this application is successful that it will be a better outcome than seeking an injunction since an injunction will only be effective until trial. It is possible that there may be an extra cost resulting from this application.

What is the time line on this?

We hope to file in approximately 4-8 weeks.

Estimated time to trial is 2-4 months after filing but is very much dependent on the court’s schedule and that of opposing counsel.

Estimated time to court decision is 2-4 months after trial but is very much dependent on the particular judge who hears the case.

— I must also remind you again that, we are in a “marathon and not a sprint”.

We will continue to take the steps that we deem necessary to further the objectives of your FATCA lawsuit.

Thank you for your support, confidence and patience.

Canada is “in the eye” of the “FATCA Storm” for two reasons.

First, the Government of Canada is a “world leader in the implementation of FATCA”.

Second, you as the citizens of Canada, and our international supporters, are “world leaders” in opposing FATCA.

Thank you for your trust.

John Richardson

ADCS-ADSC Co-Chair and Legal Counsel


Tagged with: , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized
4 comments on “From The Desk of John Richardson: Co-chair – Responding to the Government Delay
  1. Tim says:

    One thing that concerns me is will an application be more difficult to “win” because it is permanent compared to a temporary injunction until trial.


    • Tim:

      As you might expect a great deal of thought went into the bringing this application. There is never a certain outcome. That said, a major consideration was that part of the test for an injunction is what is called the “balance of convenience”.

      This means that in an “injunction hearing” a court would weigh the damage done to Canadians of U.S. origin against the damage that the banks would claim would be done to them by the uncertainty of our lawsuit. As you might imagine, the outcome could be very uncertain.

      Anyway, just so you know, this was very carefully considered.



  2. Dash1729 says:

    It’s great to hear that Mr. Arvay is taking a further action to prevent data from being turned over to the US government. I’m trying to understand the timing here, though. It seems like this new action will take 5-10 months for a decision if you add up the various time frames listed. When is the data currently scheduled to be turned over? Is the 5-10 month time frame sufficiently quick to be useful without an injunction? Won’t the IRS already have the data in 10 months? I especially take note of the fact that the time frames depend partly on the schedule of opposing counsel. I just don’t see the opposing making moving expeditiously a priority here without a little encouragement.

    I realize perhaps my questions can be answered only partially or perhaps not at all at this time as Mr. Arvay cannot fully reveal his strategy in a public forum but these are the concerns I have. Unless I’m missing something the legal tool here isn’t sufficiently fast for the job it needs to do.


  3. John Canuck says:

    No surprise, the Government plan is to prevaricate, delay and file motion after motion in order to exhaust the funds the plaintiffs have available to fight them. Their first action, namely claiming to need to review 100,000 documents, spurs the question – didn’t they read them once already? Hopefully the courts will be firm in not allowing them continual extensions to avoid the court room. They have made their tactics very clear, as they freely spend OUR money to drag this out as long as they can, which could easily be years, especially if appeals are made to unfavourable rulings.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: