法律知识分享：撞车之后要做的9件事情

[快乐痛苦]

是这样，任何人都有权利递交资料和申请加拿大最高法院的appeal, 但他们会不会接受审理是另外一回事。事实上，包括最高法院在内的所有上诉法院在决定是否接受审理上诉案件的时候都要遵循一定的规定，而不仅仅是由他们手头案件的积压程度来决定（虽然这些法院本来就有很多案件积压了）。你的案件之所以很多律师不肯接，我认为其中一个原因很可能是你案子本身的性质不符合上面说的这些规定。

不如我这几天借这个机会写一篇文章把加拿大的法律和法庭系统大概介绍一下，这样也许对你和所有人都有所帮助。

你还没回答我的问题，为什么驳回裁决没有驳回理由！你猜测的律师不肯接并不是你说的那个理由！

加拿大也不过如此，所谓的西方发达国家？

 

[素里丰田Ken]

顶！

 

[Jasmine Girl]

Mark

 

[flyingking]

 

[哈法]

你还没回答我的问题，为什么驳回裁决没有驳回理由！你猜测的律师不肯接并不是你说的那个理由！

加拿大也不过如此，所谓的西方发达国家？

人家凭什么回答你的问题！你算老几啊！好好的一个有关法律的贴子，就你一个人在这儿捣乱！

 

[JDK51]

你还没回答我的问题，为什么驳回裁决没有驳回理由！你猜测的律师不肯接并不是你说的那个理由！

加拿大也不过如此，所谓的西方发达国家？

上诉法院没有责任必须给所有驳回的上诉提供理由。加拿大最高法院选择审理的标准在《最高法院法》(Supreme Court Act) 里的第40条有具体描述：
“
Appeals with leave of Supreme Court

• 40. (1) Subject to subsection (3), an appeal lies to the Supreme Court from any final or other judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal or of the highest court of final resort in a province, or a judge thereof, in which judgment can be had in the particular case sought to be appealed to the Supreme Court, whether or not leave to appeal to the Supreme Court has been refused by any other court, where, with respect to the particular case sought to be appealed, the Supreme Court is of the opinion that any question involved therein is, by reason of its public importance or the importance of any issue of law or any issue of mixed law and fact involved in that question, one that ought to be decided by the Supreme Court or is, for any other reason, of such a nature or significance as to warrant decision by it, and leave to appeal from that judgment is accordingly granted by the Supreme Court.”
  

因为你的这个问题比较小众所以我就不多解释了，见谅。如果你需要更多信息的话请看这篇文章：
http://www.canadianappeals.com/2014...importance-test-for-granting-leave-to-appeal/

 

[快乐痛苦]

上诉法院没有责任必须给所有驳回的上诉提供理由。加拿大最高法院选择审理的标准在《最高法院法》(Supreme Court Act) 里的第40条有具体描述：
“
Appeals with leave of Supreme Court

• 40. (1) Subject to subsection (3), an appeal lies to the Supreme Court from any final or other judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal or of the highest court of final resort in a province, or a judge thereof, in which judgment can be had in the particular case sought to be appealed to the Supreme Court, whether or not leave to appeal to the Supreme Court has been refused by any other court, where, with respect to the particular case sought to be appealed, the Supreme Court is of the opinion that any question involved therein is, by reason of its public importance or the importance of any issue of law or any issue of mixed law and fact involved in that question, one that ought to be decided by the Supreme Court or is, for any other reason, of such a nature or significance as to warrant decision by it, and leave to appeal from that judgment is accordingly granted by the Supreme Court.”

因为你的这个问题比较小众所以我就不多解释了，见谅。如果你需要更多信息的话请看这篇文章：
http://www.canadianappeals.com/2014...importance-test-for-granting-leave-to-appeal/

小众？就是说抢一个人不算抢？法律忽略不计！加拿大司法界都这么想小众的？对个体可以不用不透明，不公平，随意处理？如果没有愧疚，为什么不坦荡地写出来！只要没理由，就可以不写理由的乱判，因为是个体！那么法律对个体人权是无视的，那他维护的是什么？

他不写，我写，我把整个案子写出来。

 

[shawpromo]

THANKS FOR INFORMATION

 

[中国好声音]

普法好帖。

 

[快乐痛苦]

上诉法院没有责任必须给所有驳回的上诉提供理由。加拿大最高法院选择审理的标准在《最高法院法》(Supreme Court Act) 里的第40条有具体描述：
“
Appeals with leave of Supreme Court

• 40. (1) Subject to subsection (3), an appeal lies to the Supreme Court from any final or other judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal or of the highest court of final resort in a province, or a judge thereof, in which judgment can be had in the particular case sought to be appealed to the Supreme Court, whether or not leave to appeal to the Supreme Court has been refused by any other court, where, with respect to the particular case sought to be appealed, the Supreme Court is of the opinion that any question involved therein is, by reason of its public importance or the importance of any issue of law or any issue of mixed law and fact involved in that question, one that ought to be decided by the Supreme Court or is, for any other reason, of such a nature or significance as to warrant decision by it, and leave to appeal from that judgment is accordingly granted by the Supreme Court.”

因为你的这个问题比较小众所以我就不多解释了，见谅。如果你需要更多信息的话请看这篇文章：
http://www.canadianappeals.com/2014...importance-test-for-granting-leave-to-appeal/

法条千万，为什么挑对被损害个体不利的用？为什么不去使用对恶人处罚的法条？

我在我能力范围内也可以列出法条，你是学法律的，请问有没有要求透明清晰的法条？你应该比我更清楚。

 

[Belge晓梦]

人家凭什么回答你的问题！你算老几啊！好好的一个有关法律的贴子，就你一个人在这儿捣乱！

请她到Halifax去做客。

 

[Belge晓梦]

你还没回答我的问题，为什么驳回裁决没有驳回理由！你猜测的律师不肯接并不是你说的那个理由！

加拿大也不过如此，所谓的西方发达国家？

你真可奈。

 

[Belge晓梦]

谢谢楼主。

 

[森林之歌]

楼主是热心大好人，献花赞普法好帖

 

[Winniexr]

谢谢楼主！

 

[shanshan904998999]

非常感谢您

 

[Elinor]

留着慢慢看

 

[默默的阿文]

顶一个，希望楼主的热情能保持长久些。

 

[susann]

谢谢支持！

我是UBC法律系毕业的JD，现在在Downtown的个人伤害律师事务所实习，作的基本都是车祸赔偿方面的。我每天看到很多案例都是受伤者因为对法律的不熟悉而吃很多亏，特别是华人，经常在受到不公平待遇的情况下不知道自己的权益，能忍就忍，反而让对方更嚣张。所以我想趁着我有时间的时候把一些法律方面的知识多普及一下，以免更多的同胞无缘无故受到闷亏。

郑重声明，我绝无打广告的意思，也不会留下具体的个人信息和联系方式，单纯的只是希望能做点对大家有点用的事情。

我不是很清楚什么样的知识对大家是最实用的，如果大家有任何法律相关的问题或是话题比较感兴趣的，请随时写在下面，我会尽量解答。谢谢！

感谢热心的法律人士普法，大家移民加拿大需要了解法律遵守法律同时用法律保护自己，而且汽车在加拿大几乎是生活必需品，所以和汽车相关的法律知识正是很多人需要了解的，再次对楼主的无私和热情表示感谢。

 

[holdon]

非常感谢！