GET Your Private Property Rights BACK!

This website has been established to introduce, educate and inform all who are interested in furthering their understanding of the origins and ongoing rights to real property. In our more than a decade old quest for answers, we have studied the land granting system in Upper Canada and the Province of Canada. We have researched the patented land grants of many landowners. The reading of case law, Imperial law, federal and provincial statute, historical documents, publications and our Constitution Act of 1867 has been an almost daily undertaking. But boy, have we learned a lot! Granting of land prior to Confederation was a function of the Imperial government; the prerogative of the Sovereign. And the Sovereign gifted all right, title and interest in the land and its incidents to the grantee, heirs and assigns forever, subject only to such rights as were reserved for the Crown. White pine trees, incidents of the land, were typically one of the rights reserved, but according to our Public Lands Act, those reservations were removed for all lands granted prior to April 1st, 1869. The Crown is bound by it’s grants! We have proceeded into the courts on that very basic issue of ownership and control of the trees on our owned land. The courts heard our preliminary case and our appeal, but failed to address the issues presented. Thus we are waiting to hear from the Supreme Court of Canada on whether they will grant us leave to appeal. We believe we are at a critical point in determining how landowner rights will be respected in the future. We will share our research, court documents and knowledge with all who desire to learn. We only ask that if your situation permits, you support our initiative financially so that we can finish what we have started.

.

For the past few years I ( Tony Kaluzny) have been working to see a tree by law quashed as it pertains to my property. I have had the assistance of both Joan Olech and Erika Furney to take on this matter before the courts along with several people that have contributed funds to cover court costs. A bit of history. In 2013 the Town of Grimsby presented a Comprehensive Zoning by law. It placed new restrictions on land with in the geographic boundaries of Grimsby. From my perspective this was a taking of rights that ran with the land that the town was now seeking and placing an interest without permission of the land owner. A challenge was taken to the OMB and then on to Divisional Court, the outcome was that the court stated that the town and OMB had followed the law in correctly making and implementing a by law. That was not my challenge in the matter, however Judge Parayeski made this encouraging statement page 5 line 20 ( attached Kaluzny V Grimsby) …"in my view, granting leave to the Divisional Court would be improper with respect to the motion to dismiss. That would only compound the problem created by the Kaluznys’ having raised the Crown patent issue in the wrong forum in first instance by bringing it before the OMB. The proper forum, in my view, is the Superior Court of Justice on notice to, at the very least, the province. I agree that what is really being raised by the Kaluznys’ is indeed a constitutional issue." At that time although we felt that we were on sound footing in the question about the validity of Crown patents, further research both historically and research into the settlement of Canada as we now know it, along with the laws of that time started to bring a clearer picture of what we believed to be true and also supported by current statutes of Ontario. In 2020 the Niagara Region implemented the Woodland Tree by law and again it appeared to me that part of what I did own was now being taken by the Region, they now claim interest in my trees. It is interesting that since the settlement of Canada some 200 years ago all of the sudden the Region wants right to the trees. Again with the aid of a lawyer that was researching what he called the Crown Patent theory a clearer picture of the intent of Right, Title and Interest to land given and Granted to the first settlers became apparent. We felt at the time the by law should be challenged and declared Ultra Vires. Our lawyer presented to the court supporting statutes and case law, however in the end, the court did not consider either and stated that the Region had the right to make by laws. There is a bit of irony here, we never contested that the Region could not make by laws, but rather stated based on the statutes that support my patent, the by law did not apply to my trees. We appealed the decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal where again we presented supporting statute and case law, the court did not consider any of our submissions and in simple terms said that they agreed with Application Judge's ruling. With disapointment of the position of the court we have decided to apply for leave to the Supreme Court of Canada. I would like to make it clear, that the Supreme Court does not hear every case that applies for leave. That being said although we were not successful in the lower courts, nothing has been resolved with regard to Letters Patent and the supporting statutes and case law that were not read, nor considered by either court, all of which are current and there for anyone else to use in their defence with regard to their land. ( These are stated in our application for Leave to the Supreme Court of Canada) I am attaching the draft of our application, so that you can understand the process of applying for leave and the argument that has been continually presented to the court, but has not been considered. I would also like to point out that the links to the references have been removed as some of them are linked to the portal held in the Supreme Court of Canada for our application and I do not want to overwhelm their depository with queries regarding our case.