IN KEN ADESSKY'S OWN WORDS FROM PRIVATE POST SENT TO ME (sections left out).
You tell me if you think he did well. For those that do not know - Ken is GCEI's largest shareholder and ex-CFO and 'Barreau' means 'Bar' in French and 'syndic' is the 'internal affairs' of the Bar. NOTE: Ken likes to play the victim. He only talks about winning the technicality that Leduc was illegally appointed. He NEVER deals with the facts that a jury of his peers found him guilty of misappropriating shareholder funds - THE CRUX OF THE CASE AGAINST HIM.
"As you are no doubt aware, the actions of the Barreau du Quebec, Me Michelle St-Onge, syndic, Me Claude Leduc, Syndic Ad-hoc (alleged), Me Daniel Chenard, avocat of Syndic Ad-hoc have caused great financial, reputational, professional, psychological, familial and moral damages to the undersigned. This was all due to a witch hunt that was initiated by Me St-Onge-syndic, the syndic-ad hoc and their attorney.
Takefman must have also continued harassing Me St Onge, syndic as she referred the file to Me. Leduc to act as Syndic Ad-hoc, although as the Tribunal des Professions by reasoned judgment in October 2016, correctly determined, the appointment was illegal in fact and in law.
The Tribunal des Profession concluded that Me Leduc was never legally appointed by the executive committee of the Barreau as is required by the regulation and the Act, thus his investigation, the complaint filed, the hearing and subsequent judgments were all illegal.
The fonds d’indemnisation of the Barreau concluded wrongly that I was a disbarred lawyer and awarded Takefman $50,000 in damages, which he subsequently publicized throughout the Montreal business, the Jewish and Florida communities.
The inquiry by Leduc included sending demand letters to over a dozen investors of Global Clean Energy, Inc in 2009-2010. These investors had nothing to do with the complaint of Takefman. It should be noted that the Takefman complaint was the only complaint filed against the undersigned with the Barreau. This immediately caused a ripple effect of damages to my good name, my reputation, my law firm, my immediate and extended family and the reputation and viability of the company, as dozens of investors were either contacted or started questioning myself and other officers and directors of Global Clean Energy.
Notwithstanding these facts, from what we understand, Leduc started harassing the investors to respond, even though they had no interest in getting involved with this matter. Only one other investor did respond negatively, this person was a friend and associate of Takefman’s. No other investors had anything negative to say about the undersigned or the company or with their investment. As you can imagine, this caused me great personal and professional problems and credibility issues with respect to GCE.
Subsequently in early 2010 Leduc filed the damage complaint against the undersigned. We immediately took a preliminary motion to have the file rejected and dismissed based on what we believed to be an illegal inquiry, chose juge and what we thought but could not at the time prove were blatant lies to the court by Leduc on his knowledge of how the executive committee worked and how a specific resolution naming the parties was required which was never submitted. We now know why subject document was never submitted, as the inquiry and remittance of the file to Me. Leduc was never authorized.
It then took over three years for the Conseil du Discipline to hear and adjudicate and for judgment to be rendered. The hearing commenced in June 2011, with a judgment rendered against me guilty on July 5, 2013 on three of seven counts and a judgment for sanctions rendered on August 6, 2014, at which time I was found guilty and subject to an immediate radiation. I was fortunate enough to have said decision stayed on September 16, 2014. Thus for a period of time I was unable to practice my profession.
This included a front-page article in the Montreal Gazette in May 2014 which was a very negative and damning article against the undersigned which was published in the Montreal newspaper while I was out of the country on a business trip. Just imagine the hardship and pain this caused my wife and children who had to wake up and see this article. This basically caused her to suffer a nervous breakdown which took over three years to overcome.
From the outset I knew that the actions taken by me at all times were legal and were within the norms of the Barreau and of raising funds for an active business. That is why from the outset I never gave up the fight and continued to appeal and attempt to turn this negative trail of publicity and judgments against me.
To date this matter has cost me in excess of $400,000 of legal fees, approximately over one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) of lost billable revenue. The stock price which of GCE has sunk and the company has lost numerous financing opportunities, which is directly related to the actions of the Barreau and Takefman.
I was the subject of blatant and anti-Semitic comments and representations made to the court by Me. Daniel Chenard.
As well there are in excess of sixteen (16) reported judgments from the Conseil du Discipline-Barreau, Tribunal des Professions, Superior Court and the Court of Appeal naming me in decisions which were directly related to the actions of Me Leduc and the Barreau du Quebec.
My reputation has suffered serious damages as has my earning ability, my self esteem as well as the damages caused to my law firm which has lost clients the company Global Clean Energy has been floundering and lost numerous investments due to these actions. I was forced to resign as an officer and director not by the corporation but due to the general perception in the marketplace and the stress on my family.
My family has been affected specifically my wife, children, parents, in-laws and friends who have all had to deal with the embarrassment, the gossip and the overall ugliness of this matter, which after nine years has proven to be absolutely baseless.
I have lost other business opportunities and legal matters which were referred to me which I could ultimately not handle due to my lack of financial means because of the cost to defend myself and my lack of ability to represent clients or investors as I have spent in excess of thirty (30) days before the courts of different levels defending myself, not including the time required to prepare for each and every court hearing.
In the second file regarding Paul Donert, I believe this once again was a file that was initiated by Takefman. Me Jean Michel Montbriand, syndic adjoint allegedly commenced an investigation in the file and then had it pulled by Me. Leduc in early 2010. Me. Leduc acting once again as Syndic ad-hoc claimed to have a mandate when we all know from the judgment of the Tribunal des Profession was never properly issued.
Subsequently Me. Leduc quickly filed a complaint and immediately commenced a proceeding for immediate and provisional radiation of my license which he claimed had to be heard by urgency within 10 days of filing of the complaint. The hearing commenced in June 2011 and judgment was rendered over a year later on August 27, 2012. The judgment founding that there was no reason to grant the demand for immediate and provisional radiation. This after the court spent almost 15 days in session hearing testimony from witnesses who were to Montreal from Ontario, the United Kingdom, the TD Bank, attorneys who acted in the file, handwriting expertise and all types of other proof.
Thus a new trial was required before a new Conseil du Discipline which was scheduled to commence in 2013. At the end of the day, the new Conseil du Discipline never commenced the hearing as Me. Leduc was unable to produce his witnesses or the complainants. Me Leduc subsequently filed approximately five additional motions before the Conseil du Discipline, Superior Court and Court of Appeal all to have the file heard by video-conference or Rogatory commission which were all rejected. In my opinion, Me Leduc and the Barreau used every stall tactic possible including the request for a video conference, the request for Rogatory commission as well as a judicial review by the Superior Court and the Court of Appeal, which all failed.
Yet all these hearings resulted in judgments published where the undersigned is named as a defendant or responded. Subsequently in December 2015 the Court of Appeal advised the Barreau that they had no right to conduct a Rogatory commission moving the complete Conseil du Discipline to the UK for a week to hear testimony to witnesses who were deemed not credible by a prior counsel.
The Barreau through its representative Leduc, although illegally named waited over 15 months to file a motion to dismiss its action. We agreed to the motion but insisted on costs and are now waiting an additional three (3) months to have that decision rendered.
Once it was confirmed that the appointment of Leduc in 2009 was illegal in October 2016 this matter should in our opinion have been put to bed. It is now six (6) months later and over eight (8) years since this nightmare began and I am still the subject of what I believe is a witch hunt by the Barreau who clearly acted illegally acted.
Me Leduc and Chenard had no problem in lying or misrepresenting the facts and the law to the different judicial and administrative tribunal's yet the only one suffering is the undersigned. I don't understand how the Barreau can act in this matter and still think that they are within the right while I am the only one who continues to suffer damage"
AI
