Grischun Vs Chancery

[Eðo Grischun]

If it would so please the Courts, I would like to request a decision from the courts on the following matter. In reference to Freedom of Information and Privacy (Gov.) Act:

1) In accordance with Section 1 of this Act I wish for the Secretary of State or another officer of the Chancery to provide me with all personal information held about me on the political party leaders database and also any other database containing my personal information.

2) In accordance with Section 5.6 of this act I wish for the Court to order the Chancery to remove said personal information from the database(s) excluding my Talossan name and Provincial Assignment ONLY.

I thank you for your time and would seek further clarification on the submittal protocol to this chamber if mistakes have been made.

[Martì Prevuost]

As a friend of the Cort, I object to this case being heard by the Cort and request its immediate dismissal.

The referenced act, 40RZ9 - The Freedom of Information and Privacy (Gov.) Act provides the approved (by law) method of obtaining the information - to wit a request of the government's executive offices and/or cabinet ministries.

It also provides the approved (by law) method of opting out: "Any citizen may request to opt-out of being included in this database for any reason at any time by notifying the database administrator."

And it provides exemptions which may be invoked by the various governmental agencies for not releasing the information to the requester.

ONLY THEN does the Act provide a legal remedy - access to the Cort to determine the validity of the exemption.

In short, this case is invalidly filed as there are non-judicial methods to which the appellant must avail himself before seeking a remedy from the Cort.

I am,
MAG

[Deleted]

Is this an extension of your other action or is this a separate action you are bringing before the court? If the latter, the case needs to be assigned to a Judge or Justice by the Clerk as he did with the first case.

Not to interfere, I just wanted to clarify.

[Eðo Grischun]

It was seperate. This happened, trying to act in accordance with the original FIPA opt-out then I got the idea for the bill to prevent the issue from source.

You can dismiss this action, or I withdraw action. Iusti Canun said he will remove my details from the database ASAP (his words, not mine), so this case is moot.

[Brad Holmes]

Jan 30, 2012 20:29:24 GMT -6 Eðo Grischun said:

You can dismiss this action, or I withdraw action. Iusti Canun said he will remove my details from the database ASAP (his words, not mine), so this case is moot.

So what do you want? Are you going to withdraw?

Or do you want me to assign it in hopes that it will be dismissed?

-Clerk

[Eðo Grischun]

Jan 30, 2012 20:43:39 GMT -6 Brad Holmes said:

Jan 30, 2012 20:29:24 GMT -6 Eðo Grischun said:

You can dismiss this action, or I withdraw action. Iusti Canun said he will remove my details from the database ASAP (his words, not mine), so this case is moot.

So what do you want? Are you going to withdraw?

Or do you want me to assign it in hopes that it will be dismissed?

-Clerk

Please excuse the long wait for the reply. That said your wait is still shorter than others'.

I wish to withdraw THIS case.

I am still awaiting anything regarding the other.

[Brad Holmes]

Feb 16, 2012 10:40:42 GMT -6 Eðo Grischun said:

Jan 30, 2012 20:43:39 GMT -6 Brad Holmes said:

So what do you want? Are you going to withdraw?

Or do you want me to assign it in hopes that it will be dismissed?

-Clerk

Please excuse the long wait for the reply. That said your wait is still shorter than others'.

I wish to withdraw THIS case.

I am still awaiting anything regarding the other.

Withdrawn.