Shop & Health Pass Case

Shop & Health Pass Case

Shop & Health Pass Case

Re: the Legality of covid Health Passes as a condition of access to stores

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: August 19, 2021
  • Location: Versailles, France
  • Court: Versailles administrative court
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: large shopping centers
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer:
  • Defendant: Yvelines Department
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge:
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: for the Plaintiff


*updated Feb 16, 2022

 

Background

On August 19, the Yvelines prefecture made it compulsory to use a “health passport” at large shopping centers in the Yvelines department/prefecture. [1]

Throughout Yvelines 14 shopping centers with more than twenty thousand square meters were affected. The decree had been poorly greeted by retail professionals. At the Westfield Velizy 2 shopping center some 17 security agents were hired to guard the twelve entrance doors with an estimated budget of €130 000 for the month of August. [1]

The shopping mall registered a 25 percent drop in activity and a 25 percent drop in customer flow, which is huge. [1]

“We’re really fragile, and the shopkeepers are already suffering after a year and a half of crisis. [1]

 

Significance

This case challenges the Right of Government to remove the constitutional Right of the People to have freedom of movement and access to goods and services.

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Defendant’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

After just two days of enforcement, the prefectural decree from August 19, which made it compulsory to use a “health passport” at large shopping centers in the Yvelines department, was suspended by the Versailles administrative court. [1]

“The contentious order restricts access in a broad manner, and does not provide conditions guaranteeing people’s access to essential goods and services.” [1]

 

Aftermath

The Versailles administrative court’s decision to suspend the prefectural decree establishing the obligation of the health pass in shopping centers in the Yvelines department, paved the way for other departments to follow. [1]

 

Strasbourg Also Suspends the Health Pass for Shopping Centres

The Strasbourg administrative court has meanwhile taken the same decision to stop enforcing the health pass after the manager of a shopping center in Haut-Rhin took the matter to court. The judge of the Strasbourg administrative court decided on Friday, August 27 to suspend the order of the Haut-Rhin prefect which made the presentation of the health pass compulsory in seven commercial centres of the department, especially those larger than 20000 square meters. [1]

The judge considered that with this obligation to present the health pass, “there is a serious and manifestly illegal interference with the freedom to come and go”. The restrictive measures imposed in the contested decree apply in a general and absolute manner to all businesses located in department stores and shopping centers listed in the decree, without anything having been planned to allow customers not having a pass to access shops selling basic goods and services. [1]

The measure took effect immediately. It is therefore no longer necessary to present a health pass to do shopping. However, the matter may be referred to the Council of State by the departmental administration. [1]

 

More Suits follow

After the Yvelines, it was also the Hauts-de-Seine and Val d’Oise shopping centers that stopped [2] demanding the health pass. Appeals were filed on Thursday for these two departments and on Friday for Val-de-Marne. Lawyer Yoann Sibille told Franceinfo that he had filed a complaint on Thursday with the administrative court of Cergy-Pontoise, against the decree taken in the Val d’Oise. The court must now rule within 48 hours. [1]

Sibille had written an amicable letter to the prefects of Île-de-France in which he asked them to change their orders. If the prefects do not change them, he would continue to file petitions on behalf of all people affected, he said. [1]

 

 


Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:
  • …More information is needed…

 

Media


……

source: ….


….

source: ….


….

source: ….

 

References

  1. Versailles court suspends compulsory health pass at shopping malls after just 2 days
  2. La justice suspend l’obligation du pass sanitaire dans les centres commerciaux du Haut-Rhin

 


Keyword

Administrative Court, department stores, France, Health Pass, shopping centers, Strasbourg, Versailles, Yvelines


Back to All Cases

 

Vaccine Death Insurance Case

Vaccine Death Insurance Case

Vaccine Death Insurance Case

Re: the Legality of Life Insurance claims due to Death from the Covid Vaccine

 

Back to All Cases

Facts of the Case

  • Dates: Jan ?, 2022
  • Location: France
  • Court:
  • Case #:
  • Plaintiff: Family of Deceased
  • Plaintiff’s Lawyer: Carlo Alberto Brusa
  • Defendant: Life Insurance Company
  • Trial Type:
  • Judge:
  • Status: Decided
  • Verdict: for the Defendant


*updated Feb 6, 2022

Background

A wealthy elderly man with a high value Life Insurance policy to the amount of millions of euros… dies from the covid jab. [1]

His death as a consequence of being jabbed is not disputed by the doctors, nor his life insurers. [1]

The Insurance company refused to pay the policy, citing that the taking of experimental drugs, treatments, etc., is excluded from the policy. [1]

The family takes the insurance company to court. [1]

France last year (2021) put in place a health pass that prevents people without a PCR test or proof of vaccination to enter restaurants, cafes and other venues. The government wants to turn it into a vaccine passport that means only the vaccinated can have a health pass. [2]

note: The case was published by the family’s lawyer, Carlo Alberto Brusa, on social media. Unfortunately, no sources or court records are given. [4]

 

Significance

This case legally confirms that death from the vaccine is possible, despite many claims by politicians tot he contrary. It therefore puts into question the logic and reasonableness of mandating such an inoculation to the entire population.

 

Plaintiff’s Argument

…More information is needed…

 

Defendant’s Argument

The insurance company stated the policy clearly states that deaths from experimental medicine are the same as suicide, and it doesn’t need to pay out. [3]

 

Relevant Prior Judgements/ Cases

…More information is needed…

 

Decision

The judge stated, “the experimental vaccine side effects are publicized and the deceased could not claim not to have known about them when he voluntarily took the jab. [1]

There is no law or mandate in France which forced him to be jabbed. Therefore, his death is essentially suicide”. [1]

(Suicide is explicitly excluded from this particular policy and in fact from all life insurance policies in general.) [1]

“The court recognizes the classification of the insurer who, in view of the announced side effects, including death, legally regards participation in the phase three experiment, whose proven harmlessness is not given, as voluntarily taking a fatal risk that is not covered by the contract and legally recognized as suicide.” [3]

 

Aftermath

  • Canadian former premier of Newfoundland Peckford and co-author of the 1982 Canadian Charter of Rights on his blog wrote: [1]

This has been the finding of a major western world court system and there is zero doubt that insurance companies world wide will cite this case as legal fact. [1]

Therefore, if anyone ever challenges you on whether these jabs are experimental or not, and that neither the pharma companies, nor govts, nor anyone else but YOU are responsible for accepting them and if you die, legally you have committed suicide. No insurance, no payouts, no refunds. You are on your own! [1]

  • In Austria as of Feb 1, 2022, it’s mandatory for all citizens to take the Jab. [1]
  • The French President Emmanuel Macron said on Tuesday , Jan 4 2022, he wanted to “piss off” the non-vaccinated. [2]

“I won’t send (the unvaccinated) to prison, I won’t vaccinate by force. So we need to tell them, from Jan. 15, you won’t be able to go to the restaurant anymore, you won’t be able to down one, won’t be able to have a coffee, go to the theatre, the cinema…”

The expression “emmerder”, from “merde” (shit), that can also be translated as “to get on their nerves”, is considered “very informal” by French dictionary Larousse and prompted immediate criticism by rivals on social media.

  • Actuaries have been warning that rising claims will be eroding the capital which insurers set aside to avoid insolvency. Notably, older people do not take out life insurance, which means that the claims have been from younger clients. Insurers say that they expect a rise in excess deaths. [4]
  • According to Alex Berenson, the risk of injury or death from the jab is exceptionally high judging from Canadian data. [4]
  • The refusal to pay for a vaccine-related death may not be surprising since globally the life insurance industry has been hit with reported claims of $5,5 billion in the first nine months of 2021 versus $3,5 billion for the whole of 2020, according to insurance broker Howden. [4]
  • Dutch insurer Aegon, with two-thirds of its business in the US, said its American claims in the third quarter were $111 million, up from $31 million a year earlier. [4]
  • Vaccine deaths may force insurers to raise premiums and some have indicated that they intend to punish the unvaccinated for their financial woes. [4]


Further Research

Court Documents:
  • Read the Court Ruling
In the news:

 

Media


……

source: ….


….

source: ….


….

source: ….


Back to All Cases