A case for an "imposing legal cost" award

I hate Duff Conacher SOOOOOO MUCH

So, this is interesting. I love it when the defence will be one sentence.

56.1(1) Nothing in this section affects the powers of the Governor General, including the power to dissolve Parliament at the Governor General’s discretion.

Right. So, the court will look at the subsection DIRECTLY ABOVE the very subsection that the idiots at Democracy Watch are trying to use to sue the Government. If their argument is that the PM has to loose the confidence of the House of Commons, I would like to see them find that subsection/qualifier in the statute. Not only is it the subsection directly above the one that gave rise to the so-called cause of action, but it occurred in the very same series of amendments. So, you couldn't even invoke an argument from the Hansard about how the latter subsection informed the existing bill.

The Prime Minister didn't call an election. The Governor General did. She acts on the PM's advice, but the discretion is HERS - and that discretion is NOT qualified in the statute. That was the entire premise behind the coalition, remember?

This case should be dismissed with EXTREME prejudice. With 110% of costs being awarded to the federal government. I hope it bankrupts democracy watch, they are idiots who don't' know what they are talking about.