3 ms·

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but under UK law which I suspect is similar, this is called a Civil Search Order[0] or Anton Pillar Order. "A search order

I'm not familiar with Canadian law, but under UK law which I suspect is similar, this is called a Civil Search Order[0] or Anton Pillar Order. "A search order is probably the most draconian order the court can make" [1] However there is no forcible power of entry and there is no right as such to require entry, however the judge granting the order can hold you in contempt of court and jail you if you do not grant entry. An independent lawyer must be present who is not directly acting for the plaintiff to represent the subject of the order. It's very very expensive. Edit: Canadian law does appear to be based on UK law to some extent [2] [0]https://www.inbrief.co.uk/civil-court/search-orders/ https://www.inbrief.co.uk/civil-court/search-orders/ [1] https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/2-204-8056?originationContext=document&transitionType=DocumentItem&contextData=%28sc.Default%29&comp=pluk https://uk.practicallaw.thomsonreuters.com/2-204-8056?origin... [2] https://www.mnp.ca/en/posts/civil-search-warrants-in-canada-guidance-for-anton-piller-orders https://www.mnp.ca/en/posts/civil-search-warrants-in-canada-...

jstanley 8y ago
From [0]: > That if the defendant is a woman living alone, that a woman must accompany those executing the order; This seems oddly sexist.
- PhasmaFelis 8y ago
  Protecting only one group from dangers that overwhelmingly apply only to that group is not bigotry.
dade_ 8y ago
It says in the article that it was an Anton Pillar Order. They scewed it up though, everything said by the defendent was ruled an interrogation and thrown out. Most of these companies are not run by very bright people. Their businesses are only still here because they are a government oligarchy.
- charlieflowers 8y ago
  > "everything said by the defendent was ruled an interrogation and thrown out." No, the article says that ruling was overturned later.

jstanley 8y ago

From [0]: > That if the defendant is a woman living alone, that a woman must accompany those executing the order; This seems oddly sexist.

PhasmaFelis 8y ago
Protecting only one group from dangers that overwhelmingly apply only to that group is not bigotry.

dade_ 8y ago

It says in the article that it was an Anton Pillar Order. They scewed it up though, everything said by the defendent was ruled an interrogation and thrown out. Most of these companies are not run by very bright people. Their businesses are only still here because they are a government oligarchy.

charlieflowers 8y ago
> "everything said by the defendent was ruled an interrogation and thrown out." No, the article says that ruling was overturned later.