Rocco Galati letter to Chilean CourtsRocco Galati sent a letter to both Chilean courts in the civil cases of Claro/Ossa, C 2418-2021 and C 1036-2021.
The follow is JT's cover letter for the submission of Galati's document:
~
By this act, I come to submit the document issued by the Canadian lawyer Mr. Rocco Galati, under notice of Article 346, paragraph 3, of the Code of Civil Procedure, which indicates that if the alleged specialty in Chilean mining law of the defendant Felipe Ossa Guzman is not accredited, the trial occurring in Canada, where he made a statement based on the Affidavit made in Chile, against MSX and Brent Johnson is left without evidence for their convictions in Canada.
THEREFORE,
I ASK THIS COURT: To receive the submitted document, under legal notice,
~
The following is the submitted document:
[On Rocco Galati Law Firm letterhead]
~
June 21st, 2021
To whom it may concern:
I am a lawyer representing Mountainstar Gold Inc. and Brent Johnson, in the British Columbia Court of Appeal (BCCS), from the decision of the British Columbia Securities Commission (BCSC) against Mountainstar Gold Inc. and Brent Johnson, BCSC No. 2019 BCSECOM 123.
The BCCA granted leave (permission) to appeal on both the issue(s) of liability and penalty, without restricting the scope of the appeal, which is still before the Court.
The entirety of the BCSC’s case rests on the purported “expertise” of Mr. Felipe OSSA as a Chilean “mining expert”, which expertise was contested at the hearing.
If Felipe OSSA is determined no to be a Chilean “mining expert”, then the BCSC decision cannot stand as OSSA’s evidence is the only evidence upon which the decision is based.
Should you have any questions about this letter please feel free to contact me.
Yours very truly,
ROOCO GALATE LAW FIRM PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Signed Rocco Galate, BA, LLB, LLM
~
I'm wondering who decided that submitting this letter to the Chilean courts was a good idea. It is both inappropriate and irrelevant. First, Mr. Ossa's status as a "mining expert" is not one of the five specific items upon which JL has based his suit. It is not a question on which the Court could or should rule.
Second, Galati is basing his defense (such as it is, if it ever goes to appeal court) upon an ad hominem fallacy. He is not contending that the information in Ossa's affidavit is untrue, but that Felipe Ossa doesn't have the proper background to tell those truths.
So now we discover why Galati hasn't yet filed the appeal. He and JL hope that the Chilean courts can do their dirty work for them. I think their hopes will be dashed.