Contract Law
Contractual Obligations

A contract is an agreement of wills by which one or several persons obligate themselves to one or several other persons to perform a prestation. 

Contracts may be divided into contracts of adhesion and contracts by mutual agreement, synallagmatic and unilateral contracts, onerous and gratuitous contracts, commutative and aleatory contracts, and contracts of instantaneous performance or of successive performance; they may also be consumer contracts. 

In order to form a valid contract it takes an agreement of wills. This does not simply mean that if you agree to contract then automatically you are responsible for what you contracted into. The object or reason for a contract is to bind you and the other party to perform certain actions. Whether it is to repay money or to perform services, the contract is meant to hold you accountable to what you agreed to perform.

A prestation is just a fancy way of saying- a payment in money or in services, a duty to do or not do something in fulfillment of an obligation, or the performance of such a duty. A contract any contract is governed and controlled by law. The way individuals can bind themselves to enter into a contractual agreements is a controlled environment.

There are several types of contracts that can be used.Contracts may be divided into

Contracts of adhesion - A contract of adhesion is a contract in which the essential stipulations were imposed or drawn up by one of the parties, on his behalf or upon his instructions, and were not negotiable.

Contracts by mutual agreement- Any contract that is not a contract of adhesion is a contract by mutual agreement.

A synallagmatic or bilateral contract- is when the parties obligate themselves reciprocally, each to the other, so that the obligation of one party is correlative to the obligation of the other.

A unilateral contract- is when one party obligates himself to the other without any obligation on the part of the latter, the contract is unilateral.

A onerous Contract – a contract is onerous when each party obtains an advantage in return for his obligation.

A gratuitous Contract- When one party obligates himself to the other for the benefit of the latter without obtaining any advantage in return.

A commutative contract- A contract is commutative when, at the time it is formed, the extent of the obligations of the parties and of the advantages obtained by them in return is certain and determinate.

A  aleatory contract- When the extent of the obligations or of the advantages is uncertain  A contract of instantaneous performance- Where the circumstances do not preclude the performance of the obligations of the parties at one single time.

A contract of successive performance- is where the circumstances absolutely require that the obligations be performed at several different times or without interruption.

A consumer contract- A consumer contract is a contract whose field of application is delimited by legislation respecting consumer protection whereby one of the parties, being a natural person, the consumer, acquires, leases, borrows or obtains in any other manner, for personal, family or domestic purposes, property or services from the other party, who offers such property and services as part of an enterprise which he carries on. 

Prior to ever giving your agreement to enter into the contract there is something called disclosure. This means that every action, every profit, everything that the contract will create or cause to happen must be indicated in the contract itself. Those who are entering into contract together must disclose to one another all elements of the contract, all the obligations that will be placed upon both parties by this contract agreement. Failure to do so will is against contractual law.

An offer to contract is a proposal which contains all the essential elements of the proposed contract and in which the offeror signifies his willingness to be bound if it is accepted. An offer to contract derives from the person who initiates the contract or the person who determines its content or even, in certain cases, the person who presents the last essential element of the proposed contract.

How someone becomes bound to a contractual obligation is also controlled by law. There must be an offer to enter into a contract made and there must be an acceptance of this offer in order for a contract to be formed.  To accept a contract or to give your consent or to enter into the obligation it takes either an express agreement or a tacit agreement.

An express agreement is when after all the obligations were disclosed to you, you agree and sign upon the contract to enter into contractual relationship. You promise that you will perform all the obligations on your part and you willfully accept them.

A tacit agreement is a forum, an operation of law that is used to try to bind someone to a contract without their express agreement. The law has provided a certain way that you can enter into this type contract.

The tacit agreement works as follows. You must send the original contract with all the terms and conditions disclosed upon the offer. You must provide the one you are seeking to enter into a tacit agreement with, the time to read and take judicial notice of the contract. After the time limit is expired and the party has not contacted you, you must then send an opportunity to cure. This is a necessary step and cannot be eliminated. It is part of the process of establishing a tacit agreement. You will send the party a letter indicating that they have failed to address your offer to contract and you are asking them to respond to the original request that was sent to them. You will grant them a specific time frame to respond to this letter and opportunity to cure about two weeks is fine. Failure on their part to address the opportunity to cure will place them into acceptance of the contract. You must then send a third indication to them informing them that you and the party are now in a tacit agreement, a valid contractual agreement.

There is provision for the opposite part who you are seeking to place under a tacit agreement to use in order to stop the offer and not enter into contract.  Silence does not imply acceptance of an offer. If you send an offer to contract to someone and they do not respond or they remain silent this is not an acceptance.

There is no obligation to respond unless the one seeking the contract is using the contractual operations of a tacit agreement  then silence on behalf of the other party is an acceptance of the offer. The confirmation of a contract results from the express or tacit will to renounce the invocation of its nullity. The party you are attempting to bind under an express or tacit agreement has the obligation to declare that they give up their rights to invoke the nullity of the contract you are trying to establish. In other words they will not contest or declare the contract invalid and accept to be bound to the terms and conditions.  

An offer to contract is a proposal which contains all the essential elements of the proposed contract and in which the offeror signifies his willingness to be bound if it is accepted.

What ever actions or benefits that either party will make or perform must be indicated completely and fully in the contract itself in order for the contract to be considered valid and acceptable.

The object of a contract is the juridical operation envisaged by the parties at the time of its formation, as it emerges from all the rights and obligations created by the contract. For any contract to be valid and enforceable the contract itself the way it was set up must follow a strict operation of law. They term this the juridical operation envisaged. This is where the type of contract comes into play as described earlier on this page.

Consent may be given only in a free and enlightened manner.It may be vitiated by error, fear or lesion. Only after all the terms and conditions have been expressed in the and if the contract itself has a proper juridical operation backing it then can consent or acceptance be given. 

Error vitiates consent of the parties or of one of them where it relates to the nature of the contract, the object of the prestation or anything that was essential in determining that consent. If one of the parties for example is profiting or benefiting from the contract above that which was agreed upon that would equate to error on that parties behalf. If you did not agree to allow them to benefit in a way they did, and they did not tell you this when you gave your consent to contract then you gave your consent without enlightenment and this consent can be withdrawn.

Full disclosure is their obligation to inform you of all the terms and conditions that this contract is bringing forth. Every way that the party intends to profit or receive service from this contract must be indicated within the contract. There is no if's and's or but's about this, everything must be revealed in the contract itself and failing to do so equals an invalid contract.

Is the contract that you are about to sign binding you to perform or take certain actions, these actions or performance requirements must be indicated completely and fully in the contract, If they were not presented to you and you are not provided the opportunity to read over fully to understand and comprehend what it is that would be required of you then again this is not full disclosure. If the contract is giving permission to the other party to take actions on your behalf or to do something for you it is necessary that every right and every action is clearly indicated within the contract.

Here is an example of, most of us if we look into our wallets or purses will find a plastic rectangular thing that we designate a credit card charge card I think it should be termed the fraud card instead. They solicit you and make you an offer hope you accept, here is the offer $10,000 credit limit, make an application. You accept their offer and you make an application they verify your credit score, with the credit bureaus and if your number is good enough volia they send you the fraud card. 

 With the card they will send you the terms and conditions of the card or that are attached to the card or you using the card. To keep it simple will say after 30 days you agree that whatever balance you owe them you will pay them 18% annually upon it. If after three months you haven't made a minimum payment they can demand upon you for payment, that's one of the terms and conditions of the contract’s they send.

They promise you in that contract that if you go into a merchant store that's just a fancy way of saying if you go shopping and buy something that whatever you buy or whatever you purchase, and placed that purchase on your charge card, your credit card they will pay the merchant on your behalf. So for example if you buy $100 worth of goods from the store and charged to your card what they tell you it's they will pay on your behalf the money you owe the merchant, and then you will pay them back through your credit card account. That's what they promised to perform for you. 

What they fail to inform you of in the contract, is that whatever you purchase from a merchant store whatever the total amount is, this is not the amount that they are paying or returning to the merchant.

We will stay with the hundred dollar example. You purchase $100 of goods charged to your card now the merchant has sent that slip the request to be paid to the charge card company the slip is for $100. The charge card holding company only pays $97.50 to purchase that receipt. They obtained the receipt and are holders of that note. Now a secondary company comes along and offers to purchase that receipt from them for the amount of $98.50. The charge card holding company then sells the note the merchant's request for the amount of 98.50$ to the second company and by doing so they just made a one dollar profit. Doesn't seem like much but times that by hundreds of millions of transactions every day and they're making a pretty penny.

Now if they keep it would only two interlopers in your contract that the credit card company that offered you your card just made $1.50 off your transaction, which they never told you about which you never agreed to allow them to profit in this way from the contract that you signed with them. This is an example of nondisclosure that is being used against you when you sign up for this credit card accounts

The operations of the Bank and your Patrimony.

Bank Act article 157.1 Subject to this Act, the directors of a bank shall manage or supervise the management of the business and affairs of the bank.   (e) establish procedures to provide disclosure of information to customers of the bank that is required to be disclosed by this Act and for dealing with complaints as required by subsection 455(1); 

Bank Act article 158. (1) Every director and officer of a bank in exercising any of the powers of a director or an officer and discharging any of the duties of a director or an officer shall   (b) exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances.  

Duty to comply
Bank Act article 158.(2) Every director, officer and employee of a bank shall comply with this Act, the regulations, the bank’s incorporating instrument and the by-laws of the bank. 

No exculpation  
Bank Act article 158.(3) No provision in any contract, in any resolution or in the by-laws of a bank relieves any director, officer or employee of the bank from the duty to act in accordance with this Act and the regulations or relieves a director, officer or employee from liability for a breach thereof.    
“bank” means a bank listed in Schedule I or II Toronto-Dominion Bank Bank of Montreal  

Permissible registered holder
If a person {which in the bank Act also means NATURAL PERSON} on whom the ownership of a security of a bank devolves by operation of law,{To pass on or delegate to another, To be passed on or transferred to another} other than a person described in subsection (2), provides proof of that person’s authority to exercise rights or privileges in respect of a security of the bank that is not registered in the person’s name, the bank shall, subject to this Act, treat that person as entitled to exercise those rights or privileges.    

This Copy of an act of Birth is in reality, A security in a registered  form created for the NATURAL PERSON who’s name is located thereupon as indicated John Smith.  

Bank Act definition   “person” 1« personne » “person” means a natural person, an entity or a personal representative;   a natural person is a man who can be incorporated/legal fiction.   Registered form (4) A security is in registered form if (a) it specifies a person entitled to the security or to the rights it evidences, and its transfer is capable of being recorded in a securities register; or (b) it bears a statement that it is in registered form.  

The security I am holding bears the natural person  John Smith. The security also bears a  Registration number 1197504118765.  

The Guarantor of this said valuable security is noted upon the documentation, Quebec.  

Status of guarantor 
Bank Act article 84. A guarantor for an issuer of a security is deemed to be an issuer to the extent of the guarantee, whether or not the guarantor’s obligation is noted on the security.  

Bank Act article 86 (1) A security certificate shall be signed by or bear the printed or otherwise mechanically reproduced signature of at least one of the following: (a) a director or officer of the bank; (b) a registrar or transfer agent of the bank or a branch transfer agent or a natural person on their behalf; or (c) a trustee who certifies it in accordance with a trust indenture.  

The Security certificate that I am holding has the Signature that corresponds to the above article, in the mechanically reproduced signature of {Pierre E Rodrigue {S}}.   

The agents acting on behalf of her Majesty in right of Canada /Quebec have been acting as fiduciary over this Security  through the ACT OF REGISTERING A BIRTH ,the signing over of said rights by the declarants to the agent acting in right of her Majesty.  

Dealings with registered owner
Bank Act article 93 (1) A bank or a trustee within the meaning of section 294 may, subject to subsections 137(5) to (7) and sections 138 to 141 and 145, treat the registered owner of a security as the person exclusively entitled to vote, to receive notices, to receive any interest, dividend or other payment in respect of the security and to exercise all of the rights and powers of an owner of the security.  

Now the above article states that according to the Act, the REGISTERED owner in this Act has power to exercise all the rights and powers of  THE OWNER even though they are not the OWNER.   This has been the condition with my security certificate, there was a Constructive registered holder .However I am no longer a Minor and I have legally/lawfully severed this relationship with the registered owner, the fiduciary agent.  

Constructive registered holder
Notwithstanding subsection (1), a bank may treat a person as a registered security holder entitled to exercise all of the rights of the security holder that the person represents, if that person provides the bank with evidence as described in subsection 127(4) that the person is b) the personal representative of a registered security holder who is a minor, an incompetent person or a missing person;

On this Certified copy of the security certificate it denotes the identification of the Natural person John Smith as a CHILD or a Minor, thereby creating a  Constructive registered holder, declaring that there is a  personal representative of a registered security holder who is a minor. I can assure I am not a  minor anymore.

Surf to this location in order to see how they actually did this.

                                  Notice of Determination  

September 20th 2003

The contracts that the banks, financial institutions have presented to Persons {under the term credit card, personal line of credit, ect} are filled with misrepresentations, racketeering, forgery and other actions.

The agents of the banks, financial institutions have exercised and acted upon these contracts knowing full well that these contracts contravene the Criminal Code of Canada.   The alleged/apparent offences are sub-classified as follows:

1.Misrepresentation of the substance of a transaction, pursuant/contrary to one or more of s. 51 of the Combines Investigation (Competition) Act, s. 380(1) and s. 397(1)(b) of the Criminal Code, s. 15, s. 450, s. 451, and s. 452(2) of the Bank Act, s.4 of the Canada Interest Act, and, inter alia, s. 190 and s. 192 of the Bills of Exchange Act.

2.Agency fraud, contrary to one or more of s. 380(1), s. 336, and s. 426 of the Criminal Code.

3.Forgery and offences resembling forgery, pursuant/contrary to one of more of s. 321, s. 363, s. 366, s. 367, s. 368, s. 375, s. 388, s. 390, and s. 397(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, and s. 15 and s. 238(2)(c) of the Bank Act.

4.Criminal interest rate offences, contrary to s. 347 of the Criminal Code.

5.Enterprise crime/racketeering offences, pursuant/contrary to s. 15, s. 238(2), s. 450, s. 451, s. 452(2), and s. 488, of the Bank Act, and s. 206(1)(e), s. 321, s. 366, s. 368, s. 380(1), s. 426, s. 462.3(c), and s. 462.31, of the Criminal Code.

Under the Quebec civil code article there are many Persons living in Quebec  that should be liberated from the actions of the banks and financial institutions under articles found in  the QCC {1401,and 1413 ,and 1416, and 1422}.

Your party failed full disclosure and broke the alleged terms and conditions. Where is the alleged original instrument of indebtedness?

6.The banks are creating electronic accounts generated by the Persons signatures out of thin air and terming them credit {promise to pay}, loan accounts which they are not. Then when persons wake up to the fraud that is being capitulated and refuse to honor the contract. The banks representative tries to invoke her Majesties justice system claiming loss or damage, and breach of contract. There is no Real lose or damage to the banks for the electronic account that was created causes no MATERIAL loss or damage to BMO.

7.The Person involved in this alleged contract {provide original instrument of indebtedness} after many requests to the BMO concerning the deception, and racketeering, invoked there right within the Quebec civil code /Criminal code of Canada to declare this contract null and void because this contract is contrary to public order is being presented under false pretense and deception from its inception.

8-The Person refused to continue to accept the alleged privileges associated with the account and informed the Corporation that these contracts are null and void due to the deception and fraud. Will be evidenced by certificates of reception. BMO has suffered no real material or physical loss. It is persons who are first men/women holders of equity through their signature then a legal entity, who have been deceived into signing a valuable security created out of the electronic world for the BMO instead of a credit note, they have suffered extreme prejudice and extreme loss.

These Persons had to use their natural energy which is limited in nature to perform work to obtain valuable security in order  to give it to the bank believing all along that the bank had given unto them something that was real something that could cause the BMO loss. The BMO and its representatives acted in deception and falsehood.

They should be held liable.

I further understand by the Supreme Court of Canada decision in R. v. Gaysek, supra, that once a given document is established as a false document, the offence of forgery-in-law follows as a matter of strict liability, requiring only that the accused act, or intend to act, on the document with knowledge of its falseness. Accordingly, for me to do anything the bank asks me to do pursuant to said document, will constitute an offence on my part. This I will not do.
Without ill will