Jump to content

Should be an interesting case

Recommended Posts

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/ns-sex-worker-going-to-small-claims-court-over-non-payment-1.6517196

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Interesting way to raise awareness about problems with current laws. But I doubt the judge involved will be able to help her.

  While she may have a legal agreement (verbal or written), the client involved can easily make the case that honoring it would be illegal under current Canadian laws. With C-36 creating opposing set of rules for sex workers and clients, the problem will remain until we see updates to the law.

   The claim will likely be rejected and referred to a federal court to join other C-36 challenges.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lesson #1: Johns pay your providers (and please tip for good service). Lesson #2: Give providers personal identifying information at your own risk. Yeah, that "screening process" you went through? This is what can happen.

Edited by fatboyNOTslim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, fatboyNOTslim said:

Lesson #1: Johns pay your providers. Lesson #2: Give providers personal identifying information at your own risk. Yeah, that "screening process" you went through? This is what can happen.

  To be fair, this is an extremely unusual situation.

  The outcome will likely be determined by their communications and the content of the agreement. Any language directly or heavily implying sexual services will be used to justify non-payment. While the client legal argument is valid,  I'm not sure the possible consequences are worth it. May work one time. But for the next, the outcome could potentially be deadly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting case. IANA Lawyer… but as stated… highlighting the SW part would seem to make the agreement harder to enforce. I suspect a case  more in the name of awareness. To that end, it was great seeing a sympathetic article in a major publication … such a happy contrast to some of the recent legal news in the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If nothing else, hopefully this case highlights that this exists in Canada, that SW's are not protected in the least, nor are their clients.

 

This will definitely be treated as a test case, and the outcome will either drive positive change, or make it more difficult for clients to want to provide personal identifying information. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OldandNerdy said:

This will definitely be treated as a test case, and the outcome will either drive positive change, or make it more difficult for clients to want to provide personal identifying information. 

      Small claims courts only make decisions on specific limited situations. No matter if the case is rejected or in favor of the provider, this won't change current laws and enforcement.

      Keep in mind C-36 was already challenged multiple times and this will continue until updated.

       Sex worker rights groups, individuals launch constitutional challenge of portions of Criminal Code | Globalnews.ca

       Prostitution law reform in Canada: Considering shortcomings of Bill C-36 - The Lawyer's Daily (thelawyersdaily.ca)

       Governments have failed Canada's sex workers—and they're running out of patience - Macleans.ca

       Coalition of sex work law reform advocates bring Charter challenge of sex work prohibitions | Law Times (lawtimesnews.com)

       Haak: Is Canada required to allow a commercial market for sex? | Ottawa Citizen

       

       

       

       

      

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brave move by the SP. Guys who would pull this are probably betting on getting away with it because there's no recourse for the victim. Who's gonna have the courage to speak up? Enter this woman who is putting her privacy and safety at risk. Not sure I'd have a fraction of the courage in her place. Best case scenario for her is that he equally fears for his privacy and settles fast, which I think is highly likely. Imagine the costs of a lengthy fight - lawyer's fees, reputation, family, job, blacklisting - all to skip out on a handful cash. This probably sees minutes in court room rather than years.

Edited by redmana2
proofreading
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, redmana2 said:

Brave move by the SP.

Agreed... to the earlier point, small claims may not be precedent, but it is good to see folks keep poking on taking the work out of the shadows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, redmana2 said:

Brave move by the SP. Guys who would pull this are probably betting on getting away with it because there's no recourse for the victim. Who's gonna have the courage to speak up? Enter this woman who is putting her privacy and safety at risk. Not sure I'd have a fraction of the courage in her place. Best case scenario for her is that he equally fears for his privacy and settles fast, which I think is highly likely. Imagine the costs of a lengthy fight - lawyer's fees, reputation, family, job, blacklisting - all to skip out on a handful cash. This probably sees minutes in court rather than years.

     Even if the case is rejected, it's not gonna be a big victory for the guy involved. On top of the public humiliation, he will be blacklisted by local providers and possibly from other adult businesses. The adult industry and the grey/dark market have a long history of conducting their own form of justice.

     I doubt that "free" evening will be worth it in the long term.

     

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Greenteal said:

     Even if the case is rejected, it's not gonna be a big victory for the guy involved. On top of the public humiliation, he will be blacklisted by local providers and possibly from other adult businesses. The adult industry and the grey/dark market have a long history of conducting their own form of justice.

     I doubt that "free" evening will be worth it in the long term.

     

I made no comment about the court either rejecting or accepting the merits of the case. I suggested he would settle. That means he chooses to not fight the case and agrees to pay damaged to make the matter go away before suffering any other consequences. Many lawsuits end this way because the threat of greater losses makes people seek a quick ending. This great article is perhaps part of the strategy, it's a shot across the bow - "I'm serious. Fight me, and I'll drag you into the light."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, redmana2 said:

I made no comment about the court either rejecting or accepting the merits of the case. I suggested he would settle. That means he chooses to not fight the case and agrees to pay damaged to make the matter go away before suffering any other consequences. Many lawsuits end this way because the threat of greater losses makes people seek a quick ending. This great article is perhaps part of the strategy, it's a shot across the bow - "I'm serious. Fight me, and I'll drag you into the light."

     My point is simply that no matter the outcome (including if decides to settle), the damage is done. This will impact his personal, professional life on top of any other dealings with sex workers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    I'm likely overanalyzing this. But when I first read this story, the first thing that popped into mind are those YouTube videos of young lawyers confronting police officers, security guards and shady business owners. Some of those are good and instructive as they expose abuse of power situations and scams.

    But in many, we see smartasses trolling or trying to take advantage of people simply doing their job. And this current case definitely looks like that. I could be wrong, but I'm curious to know what was his thought process. Having the law on your side doesn't solves everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2022 at 5:56 PM, Greenteal said:

      Small claims courts only make decisions on specific limited situations. No matter if the case is rejected or in favor of the provider, this won't change current laws and enforcement.

      Keep in mind C-36 was already challenged multiple times and this will continue until updated.

       Sex worker rights groups, individuals launch constitutional challenge of portions of Criminal Code | Globalnews.ca

       Prostitution law reform in Canada: Considering shortcomings of Bill C-36 - The Lawyer's Daily (thelawyersdaily.ca)

       Governments have failed Canada's sex workers—and they're running out of patience - Macleans.ca

       Coalition of sex work law reform advocates bring Charter challenge of sex work prohibitions | Law Times (lawtimesnews.com)

       Haak: Is Canada required to allow a commercial market for sex? | Ottawa Citizen

 In your opinion, when will these challenges likely reach the SCC?

       

       

       

      

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, drlove said:

In your opinion, when will these challenges likely reach the SCC?

    Hard to say as C-36 was created in reaction to the Canada Attorney General vs Bedford case. The Supreme Court of Canada struck down Canada's prostitution laws.

    Canada (AG) v Bedford - Wikipedia

    Canada v. Bedford – A Synopsis of the Supreme Court of Canada Ruling - Pivot Legal Society

    Canada (AG) v Bedford: Canada's Prostitution Laws Found Unconstitutional - Centre for Constitutional Studies

    But we can expect years before pending cases return the Supreme Court. And if C-36 or parts of are struck down again, we can expect a few more years before any new laws or amendments.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Greenteal said:

    Hard to say as C-36 was created in reaction to the Canada Attorney General vs Bedford case. The Supreme Court of Canada struck down Canada's prostitution laws.

    Canada (AG) v Bedford - Wikipedia

    Canada v. Bedford – A Synopsis of the Supreme Court of Canada Ruling - Pivot Legal Society

    Canada (AG) v Bedford: Canada's Prostitution Laws Found Unconstitutional - Centre for Constitutional Studies

    But we can expect years before pending cases return the Supreme Court. And if C-36 or parts of are struck down again, we can expect a few more years before any new laws or amendments.

I was thinking we might see some action by the SCC by about 2025 or so… Also, as you said - if parts of the law are struck down again we may end up in a grey area of de facto decriminalization until new amended laws are passed. However, by that point the conservatives will likely be back on power so what might happen then is anyone’s guess…

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, drlove said:

I was thinking we might see some action by the SCC by about 2025 or so… Also, as you said - if parts of the law are struck down again we may end up in a grey area of de facto decriminalization until new amended laws are passed. However, by that point the conservatives will likely be back on power so what might happen then is anyone’s guess…

  I don't want to be a downer. But by the time the law will be replaced or fixed, many of us(including myself) will be retired from the hobby.

  The current law is not great, but not impossible to live with. Many adult businesses and establishments were able to adapt. And for clients, it's not hard to simply NOT ASK FOR SEX!

  There will always be people taking advantage of others. But most cases are avoidable,

   Educating ourselves and learning from past mistakes, can make a big difference.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2022 at 11:34 AM, fatboyNOTslim said:

Lesson #1: Johns pay your providers (and please tip for good service). Lesson #2: Give providers personal identifying information at your own risk. Yeah, that "screening process" you went through? This is what can happen.

Unless you’re being an ass. Nothing will happen.. we do screening for people who aren’t treating us right.. am I gunna take you to court for being a perfect gentleman who I had a great time with? No, I’m taking you to court when you sexually assaulted, rob me ect.  
 

editing to add: make sure you screen your providers the same way we screen you. There is some fakes out there.

Edited by SavannahSol
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Greenteal said:

  I don't want to be a downer. But by the time the law will be replaced or fixed, many of us(including myself) will be retired from the hobby.

  The current law is not great, but not impossible to live with. Many adult businesses and establishments were able to adapt. And for clients, it's not hard to simply NOT ASK FOR SEX!

  There will always be people taking advantage of others. But most cases are avoidable,

   Educating ourselves and learning from past mistakes, can make a big difference.

I agree… it’s much safer to ask for a lady’s time or just companionship. One aspect I’m still confused about is this: There are numerous reputable ladies who advertise on sites where services are explicitly spelled out. So, even if a client is buying time as opposed to sex, if by chance it ever went to court for whatever reason, it would be difficult to feign ignorance in this regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, drlove said:

One aspect I’m still confused about is this: There are numerous reputable ladies who advertise on sites where services are explicitly spelled out. So, even if a client is buying time as opposed to sex, if by chance it ever went to court for whatever reason, it would be difficult to feign ignorance in this regard.

     In my opinion, a menu option doesn't make it an obligation. For charges to stick, they'll likely need more concrete evidence on top of other potential charges in order to make the arrest  and prosecution worth their time.

     I personally prefer more subtle ads and see in person who I'm dealing with before asking anything.

     Discussing services with a complete stranger is careless and a waste of time. If chemistry is good, you won't need to ask. If bad , will likely not happen or be forgettable.

     Better keep it simple and legal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/13/2022 at 10:34 AM, fatboyNOTslim said:

Lesson #1: Johns pay your providers (and please tip for good service). Lesson #2: Give providers personal identifying information at your own risk. Yeah, that "screening process" you went through? This is what can happen.

You blame the screening? but its about non payment. 

If they dont go around stealing sex work (wonder what other label an act like this could be.. starts w an R and ends in ape) then their name would have been held in strict confidence as thars best for a providers business, but the person who has been named breached trust and thats what happens when you breach trust.

 

Also, why i dont accept e transfers bc this ladies payment was most likely 'stolen' by way of disputing a transfer after services rendered.  Ladies get your cash upfront and dont leave your bag unattended, ive heard of guys taking the cash back out of a girls bag when they left the room without it.  The gentlemen ive seen would never.. but alas it happens sometimes. Sounds like both parties were palying a dangerous game and they got burned for it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2022 at 2:29 AM, SavannahSol said:

Unless you’re being an ass. Nothing will happen..

 

There was a case in Halifax a few years ago (or maybe it was as far back as ten years ago? I believe the name was Dorinda?) where an escort was charged (and convicted, I believe) of extorting a client. Albeit it doesn't happen very often, but it is a distinct possibility when disclosing all of your personal identifying information.

Edited by fatboyNOTslim
add
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don’t like giving much information

but I have to accept that the provider has their system for their protection and it’s understandable 

If I were in their shoes I would likely do the same

so if I don’t want to send money a certain way or provide certain information then I just have to accept that I won’t be able to book with that provider 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fresh said:

I don’t like giving much information

but I have to accept that the provider has their system for their protection and it’s understandable 

If I were in their shoes I would likely do the same

so if I don’t want to send money a certain way or provide certain information then I just have to accept that I won’t be able to book with that provider 

 

Of course. They can run their business as they see fit, and clients can determine for themselves the level of risk they're willing to take. I'm just saying that disclosing personal identifying information does not come without risk for those who are in a position to be extorted.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...