Pauline Raven and the Municipality of Kings are scheduled to be back in Supreme Court March 10 for a judicial review.
Dates were set by Judge Gregory Warner this morning, Jan. 21, in Kentville.
Coun. Raven had asked for a review of actions of the warden and county council at Oct. 1 and Oct. 15, 2013, meetings.
Earlier this month at a preliminary hearing, Judge Pierre Muise denied the application from Raven for a judicial review of what transpired involving her and Warden Diana Brothers at the Oct. 1 council meeting. He ruled that Brothers was within her authority as warden to warn Raven. However, Muise has ruled the court will hear the application for judicial review of the code of conduct investigation of Oct. 15.
This morning in court, county lawyer Jonathan Cuming told Warner that, if two motions recommended by council by the county’s committee of the whole Jan. 21 were passed, the review “would be rendered moot.”
“They’ve done nothing with regard to the code of conduct issue,” Raven’s lawyer Peter Muttart countered before the judge.
“We don’t desire a war in front of the court,” Muttart commented later.
“But you are in one,” Warner countered.
Warner said all remaining issue and arguments could be dealt with in the March hearing and ended the proceedings by noting that, on this date in history, France’s King Louis XVI was executed, after “there was a revolt in the palace.”
After the session adjourned, prior to seeing the specific motions dealt with by council, Raven’s lawyer Peter Muttart said, as Cuming represented the motion in court, it was not enough to resolve the complaint.
“It doesn’t appear to contain an acknowledgement that the code of conduct procedure against Coun. Raven are withdrawn,” Muttart said.
“My representation to the court that a code of conduct investigation or investigations took place on one or more occasion. I will be submitting documentation in support of that.”
Muttart said he would be reviewing any motions on the issue passed by council Jan. 21 with his client and asking her for direction.
“A simple motion from council rescinding any code of conduct investigation and there results, whether behind closed doors or otherwise, would resolve the whole matter.”
Raven and the county’s chief administrative officer Tom MacEwan were unavailable to comment after the court proceedings, as council was in session.
More to come.