Chretien Awarded 200 K in Court Costs


View Poll Results: Should Chretien return the money
Yes 4 66.67%
No 2 33.33%
Voters: 6. You may not vote on this poll

Goober
Free Thinker
#1
I wonder if any Liberal will step up and say pay it back - No i guess not.
Another knife thru the Liberal Party.

Chrétien wins $200,000 in sponsorship feud; PMO demands he give it back - The Globe and Mail

Chrétien wins $200,000 in sponsorship feud; PMO demands he give it back

Ottawa has to pay $200,000 in legal costs incurred by Jean Chrétien in his fight to restore his name after being blamed for the sponsorship scandal by the Gomery inquiry in 2005.

However, the Prime Minister’s Office called the ruling “disappointing,” and said the money rightly belongs to taxpayers.

It is our belief that the Liberal Party must pay back the millions of dollars stolen from taxpayers through the sponsorship scandal. We call on Jean Chrétien to give this $200,000 back to taxpayers on behalf of the Liberal Party,” PMO spokesman Carl Vallée told The Globe and Mail.

Mr. Chrétien refused to comment on the matter, as did John Gomery, the former judge who came down hard in 2005 on the former prime minister for his role in establishing the scandal-plagued sponsorship program.

Mr. Chrétien’s reputation was clearly tarnished by the final report of the Gomery inquiry, which stated he created a program that was secretive and circumvented normal administrative safeguards.

However, the former prime minister convinced the Federal Court in 2008 to strike out the negative findings against him, arguing that Mr. Gomery, through a series of public comments during the hearings, showed a clear bias. The Federal Court of Appeal later upheld the ruling, and last week, the Federal Court ruled in Mr. Chrétien’s favour on the issue of legal costs.

In his ruling, Mr. Justice François Lemieux decided to award five times more money than Ottawa was offering because of the high stakes at play.

“The appeal concerned the reputation of a former prime minister of Canada and the proper conduct of federal commissions of public inquiry. These were important and complex issues of public importance,” Judge Lemieux said.

Mr. Justice Max Teitelbaum of Federal Court ordered in 2008 that all sections of Mr. Gomery’s report dealing with Mr. Chrétien and his former chief of staff, Jean Pelletier, be considered “void.”

It was sweet victory for Mr. Chrétien who had chafed under Mr. Gomery's characterization of him as “small-town cheap,” and insisted his legacy was being unfairly tarnished.

Mr. Gomery's chief sin, according to Judge Teitelbaum, was a preoccupation with the media spotlight that led him to give interviews he should have eschewed, make comments that indicated he judged issues before all evidence was heard, exhibited bias against Mr. Chrétien, and trivialized the inquiry proceedings.

Mr. Pelletier, who is now deceased, also received $200,000 in legal costs, to be provided to his succession.
 
CDNBear
#2
Nah, he shouldn't have to pay it back. He's not a Conservative.
 
IdRatherBeSkiing
+1
#3
I would like him to pay it back but obviously he is not legally required to do so.

It would be a good PR move to donate that amount to charity.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+1
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Nah, he shouldn't have to pay it back. He's not a Conservative.

Well Harper has Clement.
Charge of Treasury Board - Fox in the henhouse would be appropriate.
 
Cannuck
No Party Affiliation
#5
Well, the courts are always right.
 
CDNBear
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by CannuckView Post

Well, the courts are always right.

Not the first time you've been wrong, certainly won't be the last.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+1
#7
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Not the first time you've been wrong, certainly won't be the last.

Looks like a body slam to me.
 
mentalfloss
#8
Government to compensate Chretien $200,000 for sponsorship challenge

OTTAWA — The federal government will pay former prime minister Jean Chretien $200,000 to cover some of the legal costs from his challenge of the Gomery inquiry into the sponsorship scandal.

A ruling earlier this month shows Federal Court Judge Francois Lemieux awarded Chretien the lump sum, which covers close to half of his total legal bills. Chretien had sought $300,000, while federal lawyers argued he should receive $36,205.

"The appeal concerned the reputation of a former prime minister of Canada and the proper conduct of federal commissions of public inquiry. These were important and complex issues of public importance," Lemieux said in the ruling.

"It is appropriate in this case that the lump sum award represent a significant contribution to the costs incurred by Mr. Chretien while remaining within acceptable standards for party-party costs representing a compromise between compensating the successful party while not unduly burdening the unsuccessful party."

Chretien secured a legal victory in 2008 when the Federal Court ruled the 2005 inquiry on the sponsorship scandal, conducted by Judge John Gomery, showed a "reasonable apprehension of bias" toward the former prime minister.

In a ruling last February Federal Court Judge Robert Mainville awarded Chretien $25,000 to cover some of the bills incurred for fighting the federal appeal of the 2008 decision. Chretien had asked for $70,000.

The $200,000 lump sum is meant to cover the original Federal Court judicial review.

In the ruling, Lemieux said he appreciated that the costs of preparing for the judicial review "required the expenditure of considerably more time in legal resources than the appeal before the Federal Court of Appeal did."

Chretien's counsel stressed the result of the judicial review application was significant and restored the damage to his reputation. The amount of legal work required was "extraordinary," the ruling said, amounting to more than 1,700 hours of lawyers' time and the review of "factually complex" material adding up to 280,000 pages.

"The issues were important to Mr. Chretien since his legacy was at stake," counsel said in the written ruling.
 
mentalfloss
#9
If he was awarded something legitimately in court, why would he have to pay it back?

It will go to his lawyer anyway.
 
mentalfloss
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Ya gotta learn - They are all crooks - Cons - Libs -

Bloc
 
Goober
Free Thinker
+1
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

If he was awarded something legitimately in court, why would he have to pay it back?

It will go to his lawyer anyway.

Why principles my good man, principles. But he does seem somewhat lacking I would say. What say you?
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Bloc

Bloc Who?????
 
Spade
Free Thinker
#13
I am neither Liberal nor Conservative. I will be impartial. Okay, here goes...
The settlement is reasonable. We should all learn to accept the rule of law.
 
Goober
Free Thinker
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

I am neither Liberal nor Conservative. I will be impartial. Okay, here goes...
The settlement is reasonable. We should all learn to accept the rule of law.

The rule of law only decides on the Law as it stands. It does not rule on what is right or wrong. Just the law. Legally he skitted away. Morally, well he left those behind quite some time ago.
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Why principles my good man, principles. But he does seem somewhat lacking I would say. What say you?

I thought Cretin did a fine job of tarnishing his own reputation. Such as it is(was).

More to the point since it was Gomery that made the comments he is the one that should be paying, not the Canadian taxpayer.
 
Retired_Can_Soldier
+2
#16  Top Rated Post
Maybe he could borrow $200,000 from BM.
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
+2
#17
Should he return the money? Yes. Will he? No.

Chretien, Mulroney. Scum sucking politicians sticking it to the people long after they leave office. Oh my, I may have just exhibited bias against them. Oh well, just give 'em a few hundred grand out of general tax revenue. We got plenty right?
 
Tonington
#18
What fine traditions we have politically in this country.
 
CDNBear
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

What fine traditions we have politically in this country.

There only as important as the political partisanship will allow.
 
lone wolf
Free Thinker
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by GooberView Post

Well Harper has Clement.
Charge of Treasury Board - Fox in the henhouse would be appropriate.

One must be so careful what they ask for....
 
CDNBear
+1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by lone wolfView Post

One must be so careful what they ask for....

Tell me about it.

I asked for a 6' Norwegian blonde for Christmas.

I got this...



Next time I'll be more specific.
 
Colpy
Conservative
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Tell me about it.

I asked for a 6' Norwegian blonde for Christmas.

I got this...



Next time I'll be more specific.

Sexy Norway - hot blonde babes - YouTube



Just call me Santa............
 
taxslave
No Party Affiliation
+1
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by CDNBearView Post

Tell me about it.

I asked for a 6' Norwegian blonde for Christmas.

I got this...



Next time I'll be more specific.

Looks fine to me. Probably big enough to haul your fat *** around.
 

Similar Threads

7
Lawyer awarded $6 million
by JLM | Aug 12th, 2010
0
M.S.C. Awarded to U.S. Citizen
by FiveParadox | Jun 26th, 2006
no new posts