Click to hear Ian Jessop interview Diana Daunheimer on Angle/Bellatrix’s many non-compliances and their April 13, 2015 attack on her lawsuit in Court of Queen’s Bench:
Demanding $33,000 installments – regularly – to pay for the company’s legal fees – before trial and before a judge rules!
In the interview, Diana read this concluding paragraph from Klippensteins’ Brief in response to Angle’s (now Bellatrix) Application for Security of Costs:
Read the full brief by Klippensteins
…
An Alberta government lawyer argued in court this week that Jessica Ernst’s lawsuit on hydraulic fracturing and groundwater contamination should be struck down on the grounds that it would open a floodgate of litigation against the province.
“There could be millions or billions of dollars worth of damages,” argued Crown counsel Neil Boyle.
…
Slides from Daunheimer speaking events
Diana Daunheimer in her home west of Didsbury, Alberta
2013 12 06 Daunheimer vs Angle (now Bellatrix) Energy
THIS ACTION IS FOR OUR FAMILY, OUR COMMUNITY, OUR FUTURE
At it’s simplest, this is a case about our constitution and a families right to security and peaceful enjoyment of their property. At it’s most complex we will present our case for health harm and property damage from industrial operations in close proximity to our home. Operations and emissions that were not adequately or ethically disclosed to us, (or our neighbours, community or municipality for that matter) in absolute negligent defiance of the duty of care owed to us (all of us) by the Company.
…
THE FOURTH APPLICATION FROM THE DEFENDENTS- SECURITY FOR COST AWARDS – HEARING, CALGARY COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH (details below)
December 19, 2014 [Happy Holidays from Bellatrix (and Encana)?], before we have even signed and returned the order from the last application, another rather unpleasant application has come to my inbox. BD&P [Bellatrix] has filed a security for cost awards.They want us to put $33, 000 in trust or payable to the Court, that would cover the costs of Defendant’s to the end of questioning, along with paying another $1500 for their application in the matter. They have submitted an affidavit and quantum of costs for the entire action to the end of a trial and the grand total is just under $250, 000. This is their best and conservative guess as to what we would be owing to BD&P for this action, if it goes to trial and we lose. This does not include our costs. If we have to hire the same caliber of lawyers and experts, as we will likely have to do, we too are facing a quarter of a million in costs. Starting to see why there are so very few actions that have made it to trial and set precedents regarding oil and gas industrial negligence.
Angle Energy has sold to Bellatrix and the AER is using this as an excuse not to levy any more enforcements against Angle. Despite me continuing to find evidence of negligence in company files, the AER states that the licensee no longer exists, therefore there is no-one to issue the enforcements to.
If the order is granted on this application, our action will be stayed until such time as the security is met and if we can not meet this cost award in the time set by the Master, our action will be struck. Of course this is just this application, the Defendants can file numerous applications for security for costs awards as the action progresses and the window will be wide open to do so, if the first application is successful. This is a tactical move on the defendants part and after speaking with outside counsel on the matter, the consensus is, it is a very aggressive and particularly nasty one. They know we are not wealthy and such an application ties up what little capital you do have to fight this action, forcing you out of the legal system because you simply can not afford it. This is entirely against the Rules, if you have a claim with merit, costs should not prejudice that action from progressing.
Not only is the cost awards a very hostile manoeuvre, the scheduling of the hearing, on January 12th, with no consultation on finding a mutual date is absurd. Again, outside counsel has mentioned they are clearly taking advantage of the fact that we are self-representing and this would NEVER occur if there were two firms involved.To submit this application on a Friday at 3pm, just as our children are getting off the bus for winter holidays, is asinine and they know it. Angle and BD&P set out to tarnish our holidays with the anxiety of appearing before the court again and know this puts a great deal of pressure on me to prepare for the hearing, in such a short window. To schedule the hearing without consulting us, or providing ample time to prepare is heavy handed and intensely unprofessional. There is no doubt we have faced intimidation and inequality because of self-representing.
Bellatrix 5-15 sour crude oil site near Daunheimer’s home, used for 3 years as waste and pipe storage, drains directly into the Rosebud River and with potential to impact area well water users.
… We need counsel and we need it yesterday! In the meantime, I request an adjournment for the application. Now, as I was told and have been told many times previously, such an adjournment would readily be granted between law firms. Of course, they would have mutually agreed on a hearing date in the first place, but in the event opposing counsel requests an adjournment, it’s normal legal courtesy to accommodate that realistic request.
Not these guys, two days after my request, BD&P emails to say they will not adjourn the hearing, in a most disagreeable way. It was looking like I would have to be in Court on Monday, Jan 12, 2015 to ask the Master in Chambers for the adjournment, that BD&P was unwilling to grant. That was until the lawyers we retained to assist us in resisting this application sent a letter to James. What a beautiful letter that was, I am not kidding, it almost made me weep. Legal documents are hardly moving sentimental prose, but this represented the credence and knowledge I was lacking to tackle this application and afford me the pure relief that the burden for preparation was no longer all on my unqualified shoulders. Until this time and for the past year, I was getting pushed hard and largely disrespected by the Defendant’s legal team. Even if I had written the exact same letter for adjournment, I’d still be facing a hearing on the date set by them. The situation looks much different with counsel obtained on our side, the hearing has been adjourned to April 13, 2014. This date is a full month later than I originally requested for adjournment, which was balked at by counsel for Bellatrix.
It has been a fascinating, at times demanding experience tackling this action thus far as a self-represented litigant. Just a mere week into obtaining counsel for this latest application and I am even more captivated as to how the process has evolved. [Emphasis added]
2014: Painting by Diana and her children, given in person to Ex-Encana VP, appointed by Alberta government AER Chair, Gerard Protti, sipping a beer at a synergy schmooze fest with SPOG and others in Red Deer. More details
SECURITY OF COSTS HEARING IN CALGARY COURT OF QUEEN’S BENCH
APRIL 13, 2015
[Refer also to:
…
Bob Willard, Senior advisor at the Alberta Energy Regulator, agreed to speak about current regulations.
David Kattenburg: Why aren’t these things being monitored for in the gases that are coming out from flaring and incineration stacks?
Bob: The long list that you’ve identified would be the responsibility for monitoring of not only the Alberta Energy Regulator, but the Environment department themselves, and I would direct you once again to ESRD for them to identify what their plans are relative to updating those guidelines.
David: I have actually, I’ve tried valiantly I’d say to try to get them to explain to me why they have these guidelines that say all industry MUST conform to these guidelines, and then I said well why does directive 60 of the Alberta Energy Regulator only establish monitoring requirements for sulfur dioxide and he said: “speak to the Alberta Energy Regulator.”
Bob: Um, it is important, and this is something the Energy Regulator does lead, is capturing the metrics of the volumes of material, so we do have good metrics as to the volumetrics.
David: But essentially nothing about the composition of those gases, other than sulfur dioxide.
Bob: A totally accurate composition, I would certainly volunteer that no, we do not have a totally accurate comprehensive information on the flare composition rather, we have it for the uh volumes, but not necessarily for the compositions.
Full Interviews: Canaries in Coal Mines, Air Monitoring Appeals by David Kattenburg, December 14, 2014, Greenplanetmonitor.net
Health scare over backyard fracking in Canada; Locals sue fracking companies in Alberta
Many thanks to the courageous independent journalists and media (Andrew Nikiforuk at The Tyee, David Kattenburg at Green Planet Monitor and Deutche Welle, and Ainslie Cruickshank with The Whitehorse Star) for reporting on the Daunheimer case when mainstream media haven’t. Diana presented her case to the Yukon frac panel in January 2014.
And many thanks to Ian Jessop and CFAX 1070 for giving Diana Daunheimer a voice on the show