Nomi Davis and Jessica Klein have initiated a Class Action Lawsuit against BC Hydro regarding the installation of wireless Smart Meters on their homes and businesses.
DECISION – JULY 12, 2016
– http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/Judgment-of-Madam-Justice-Adair,84,4472
– http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/CLASS-ACTION-Lawsuit-PACKAGE,2,3617
July 20, 2016: COMMENTS about Judge Adair’s DECISION not to certify the class action. For now, please do not send in registrations or donations for legal costs.
Nobody has ever said that the challenge of bringing public accountability to BC Hydro would be easy, but significant and encouraging steps have been realized despite the court’s refusal of the application for class action certification of a civil lawsuit against BC Hydro.
Of greatest importance is that the foundational argument of the case survived the attack by BC Hydro, and the court found merit and plausibility in the success of a cause of action which embodied the Charter of Rights, Section 7 Liberty Interest. In short, the court recognized that the right to be free from government interference regarding choices of a fundamental and personal nature within one’s home was a valid argument. Now that’s a success that we would not have achieved without this class action application.
The court’s recognition of the Section 7 Liberty Interest as it relates to forced smart meter application and unacceptable microwave radiation emissions exposure therefrom is a major development and a big step up the stairway to success.
Where this court application for class action certification failed is in the identification of a common class. There are several main reasons which cause concern over smart meter installation – health damage, health concerns, fire risk, security & surveillance and billing concerns account for the majority of varied reasons which could give rise to a resident refusing a smart meter. Given that the court was analyzing the viability of the class action procedures, not the merits of the case, it is clear that the next action would be one where the class of persons would need to be narrowed so that there was a common issue within the group.
Since the court has affirmed the viability of a Section 7 Liberty Interest cause of action, now is the time to analyze how to use this valuable court decision as a relevant legal landmark upon which a refined case can be brought against BC Hydro.
It is also important to note that the decision did not assert that the microwave radiation emissions from smart meters is safe, and since the Notice of Civil Claim against BC Hydro was filed in 2013, recent credible science is reporting the possibility of devastating ill health effects from wireless exposure. Unfortunately, scientific articles which would have further supported health concerns were released after the court had closed submissions. Check out the US National Toxicology Program science article on brain and heart cancers from two years intermittent “cell phone” exposure. (http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/05/26/055699)
BC Hydro asserts that the Clean Energy Act allows them to act with impunity even though its actions and the roll out of the smart meter program violates our fundamental principles of a democratic society. We know that the Charter protection afforded to every individual in BC is activated when members of the public are being subjected to undemocratic and oppressive tactics of a governmental agency, and BC Hydro is not excluded from the responsibility to abide by the Charter of Rights. While we disagree with certain statements made in the court decision, we are thankful for the recognition of the validity of the Charter Section 7 Liberty Interest argument, and now continue to seek redress as we move ahead.
This decision has opened the way for individual civil claims against BC Hydro under the Charter Section 7 Liberty Interest. There can be as many individual claims as people feel their rights have been frustrated. Any customer of BC Hydro who is interested in pursuing civil action against BC Hydro is encouraged to take this Supreme Court Decision to a lawyer versed in constitutional law for an opinion on the merits of their individual situation. We would like to hear from anyone who receives legal advice affirming their case against BC Hydro under Section 7 of the Charter.
For complete information re Lawsuit:
I would like to make people aware that BC Hydro maintains that they are righteous in their forcible use of Smart Meters in our homes because Health Canada has deemed the technology safe. I contacted Health Canada to inquire about this. There is one department responsible for deeming all technology safe for use. They were unavailable for me to speak with. Perhaps lobbying Health Canada is next.
Hydro is never right to use force, IMHO. Granted Hydro as well as Dr. Perry Kendall, who is the BC provincial health office, hide behind Health Canada’s Safety Code 6, trying to convince people that this is a guideline that can be trusted to protect us. In fact what it does is allows Kendall, who tells Hydro that the smeters are safe, to not do his job. I and others have given him many hundreds of studies showing how dangerous RF is, but he ignores them, saying that there is no evidence of harm. Not true, but also deliberately misleading. Provincially we should demand that Kendall do his job and protect the public from something that has been shown to have the potential to be very dangerous. A public health doctor is to protect people from things that could be harmful, not wait until people are sick. Kendall could stop smart meters and other things like wifi in school. He has the authority. When people get sick, he should be held personally responsible for being harmfully negligent.
I am not saying that we should not be lobbying health Canada. We should. They are corrupt, filled with industry affiliated people. We should be doing both. Go after Health Canada and Perry Kendall.
Cristy Clark bribed the judge. There is no other way to describe this…