NO. VANCOUVER REGISTRY IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA BETWEEN JIMMY NOWZER MISTRY PLAINTIFF AND SHIAMAK DAVAR DEFENDANT NOTICE OF CIVIL CLAIM This action has been started by the Plaintiff for the relief set out in Part 2 below. If you intend to respond to this action, you or your lawyer must ?le a Response to Civil Claim in Form 2 in the above?named registry of this court Within the time for Response to Civil Claim described below, and serve a copy of the filed Response to Civil Claim on the Plaintiff. If you intend to make a counterclaim, you or your lawyer must ?le a Response to Civil Claim in Form 2 and a Counterclaim in Form 3 in the above?named registry of this court within the time for Response to Civil Claim described below, and serve a copy of the ?led Response to Civil Claim and counterclaim on the Plaintiff and on any new parties named in the Counterclaim. JUDGMENT MAY BE PRONOUNCED AGAINST YOU IF YOU FAIL to ?le the Response to Civil Claim within the time for Response to Civil Claim described below. TIME FOR RESPONSE TO CIVIL CLAIM A Response to Civil Claim must be flied and served on the Plaintiffi if you reside in Canada, within 21 days after the date on which a Copy of the filed Notice of Civil Clailn was served on you, if you reside in the United States of America, within 35 days after the date on which a copy ofthe filed Notice ofCivil Claim was served on yon, il'you reside elsewhere, within 49 days after the date on which a copy of the filed Notice ofCivil Claim was served on you, or if the time for Response to Civil Claim has been set by order ofthe court, within that time. CLAIM OF THE PLAINTIFF PART 1: STATEMENT OF FACTS l. The Plaintiff. Jimmy Nowzer Mistry, is a cameraman for 8 Vancouver television station, resident in North Vancouver, British Columbia whose address for service is c/o Cooper Litigation, 540 -- 220 Cambie Street, Vancouver, British Columbia. 2. The Plaintiff was born in Mumbai, India on December 3, 1981, and moved to Toronto, Ontario around February 2004 and then to North Vancouver, British Columbia around September 2004. 3 The Defendant, Shiamak Davar, (the "Defendant Davar") has a residence at-- North Vancouver, British Columbia The Defendant Davar also has a residence imam--Mummi- 4. The Defendant Davar is a choreographer and dance performer and founder and operator of "The Shiamak Davor Dance Company", a performing dance company, and "Shiamak Davar International", an international dance academy. The Defendant Davar's website WM'ShiZmakcom states, among other things, that "Shiamak Davar International" is the world's biggest dance academy operating across India, Canada, Australia, the UAE and the UK, and that ?The Shiamak Davar Dance Company? is a dance troupe personally trained. by the Defendant and which travels globally with the Defendant ?to take the varied colours and energy of Indian culture to international audiences?. The Defendant Davar?s website asserts that the Defendant Dayar is the ?Guru. of Contemporary Dance in India?. 5. The Defendant Davar?s ?Shianiak Dayar International? dance academy offers dance classes at numerous locations throughout Vancouver, North Vancouver, Burnaby and Surrey. 6. The Defendant Davar is the leader of a spiritual group called VRRP Spiritual Learning. Among other things, the group believes that there is one god, that one needs to be a good person on earth, and that one will undergo reincarnation. The group?s founder and initial leader, Ms. Khorshed Bhavnagri, purported to receive messages from her deceased two sons (Vispi and Ratoo) and later her husband (Rumi) whom she claimed were communicating to her from the spirit world and giving her and her associates, including the Defendant Davar, instructions. In 2007 Ms. Khorshed Bhavnagri died and the Defendant Dayar succeeded her as leader of the spiritual group. 7. Around 1998, some members of the VRRP spiritual group moved from India to reside in a speci?c area of North Vancouver, initially under the leadership of Ms. Bhavnagri, and since 2007 under the leadership of the Defendant Davar. Defendant Davar?s Sexual Grooming of the Plaintiff 8. The Plaintiff joined the Defendant?s dance classes in Mumbai, India when he was in high school, around 17 or 18 years old. The dance classes were at a school founded and operated by Davar, called Shiarnak Davar?s Institute of the Performing Arts (SDIPA). At the time Dayar was the primary person for western dance in India and was a big name and a celebrity in India. 9. After about a year the Plaintiff was selected to be a part of the dance company and shortly after became a core dancer at SDIPA. He was also asked to start teaching dance classes at the school. After the Plaintiff was selected to the core company and started teaching classes he had more exposure to the Defendant and attracted the Defendant?s attention. 10. Thereafter and over a period of several months the Defendant began. a grooming process to manipulate the Plaintiff into sexual submission. The Defendant began to include the Plaintiff in a smaller group or clique of about 7 or so dancers, mostly male. within the core company. The Defendant spoke more to this group in classes and rehearsals than to the rest of the company, praising them and touching them including the Plaintiff in a ?irtatious way. This small group was also in all the shows and performances with the Defendant and taught the dance classes at the school. ll. The usual routine which the Plaintiff became part of was that at night after the rehearsals or shows had finished the Defendant would take the small group of 7 or so dancers out for coffee and treats at restaurants in 5 star hotels After that, on most nights. the Defendant would invite them over to his house to watch movies in his bedroom. The one or two girls in the group usually went home. The Defendant would put on. a movie and close the door to his bedroom and lie on his bed wearing only his underwear. The Defendant would ask the boys including the Plaintiff to lie in the bed with the Defendant and stroke his body. 12. At the time, the Plaintiff thought the Defendant?s behaviour and interactions with him and the other boys in the small group must be normal. From the time he joined the dance school he had seen the Defendant surrounded by a clique of boys and young men with Whom the Defendant interacted physically. The Defendant created an environment in which his physical interactions with young male dancers and students became the norm. The Plaintiff also thought that because the Defendant was a big name in dance in India and so well known that his behaviour had to be acceptable and correct. Defendant?s Sexual Advances and Sexual Acts towards the Plaintiff: 13. This pattern of behaviour continued for several months. Then, in around mid?2001, the Defendant took his inner circle of dancers including the Plaintiff on a 3 or 4 day vacation to a beach house in Mandawa, a few hours away from Mumbai. 4 14. While in Mandawa, the Defendant talked a lot about the spiritual group he was a follower of and very involved with. He talked about Ms. Bhavnagrik books and exposed the Plaintiff to the group?s ideas and beliefs. The Plaintiff was deferential to the Defendant?s direction. He became intrigued with and was attracted to the group?s underlying principles, and soon became a member of the sect. 15. The group?s teachings include that there are different spiritual levels. Every few months or so members of the group are assigned a numerical ranking by the leaders. A higher number or ranking means that the member is rising spiritually and a lower number means that the member is falling spiritually. Someone with a higher number has a higher spiritual level. 16. The Defendant had a higher spiritual level in the group than the Plaintiff. The Defendant?s status in the group made the Plaintiff want to please the Defendant to improve his spiritual standing. The Defendant would say to the Plaintiff ?Darling if you listen to me and trust me then I will help you rise?. If a member did something that did not please the Defendant, then the member would receive a lower number and fall spiritually. The Plaintiff tried to please the Defendant and not to do anything that would upset the Defendant or displease him, in order that the Plaintiff would keep ?rising? spiritually. 17. In Mandawa, the Defendant increased his physical interaction with his small clique of male dancers including the Plaintiff. The Defendant kissed the boys on their lips in the presence of the Plaintiff. He frequently touched the Plaintiff and kissed him on the mouth. On one occasion he kissed the Plaintiff and gave him a ?hickey? on his neck (collectively, the ?Sexual Advances?). The Defendant told the Plaintiff not to tell anyone about the Sexual Advances. 18. After the trip to Mandawa, the Defendant escalated his physical contact with the Plaintiff and his clique of male dancers and his interactions with them became more overtly sexual. The Defendant would invite the group to watch movies in his bedroom after shows and rehearsals. He would lie on the bed in his underwear and take someone?s hand including the Plaintiffs and put it on his underwear over his penis and say ?this is normal, see I am not getting aroused?. One time the Defendant asked one of the male dancers to suck his nipples ?as if he were sucking his girlfriend?s tits? and then took the Plaintiffs hand and put it on the Defendant?s penis and said ?make sure I don?t get hard? (the ?Further Sexual Advances?). 19. At the time the Plaintiff thought the Defendant?s behaviour including the Sexual Advances and Further Sexual Advances must be correct and did not question the Defendant?s actions or motives. The Plaintiff was deferential to and anxious to please the Defendant as his spiritual adviser and guru and as someone whom the Plaintiff believed was ?higher? than him spiritually, as well as being his respected dance instructor who was a celebrity in. India. 20. The Plaintiff graduated from high school around 2000 and. over the next three years he made numerous trips all over the world with the Defendant and his dance company, putting on shows and performances. When the Plaintiff was back in India he studied for a commerce degree at a college in Mumbai. 21. Throughout this time period, on trips abroad and back in India, the Defendant continued to interact with the Plaintiff in a physical and sexual way. Among other things the Defendant: frequently kissed the Plaintiff on the mouth and touched the Plaintiff?s body including his genitalia over top of his clothing; showered in the Plaintiff?s presence and. asked the Plaintiff to hand him. his towel while making sexual jokes; (0) attempted to kiss another boy who resisted and the Defendant laughed it off and turned to the Plaintiff and kissed him on the mouth saying ?Jimmy is comfortable with his sexuality so if you are too then you will let me kiss you as well?. (the ?Sexual Demands?) 22. The Defendant also displayed a possessive manner towards the Plaintiff. He appeared jealous if the Plaintiff went out with his college friends. When the Plaintiff started going out with ha, a female dancer in the Defendant?s dance company, and she became his girlfriend the Defendant would often tell her ?Jimmy loves me more than you?. The Defendant would also frequently say things to the Plaintiff like ?You know I are number one in your life and then comes your girlfriend?. Sexual, Financial and Spiritual Control of the Plaintiff by the Defendant: 23. The Plaintiff completed his commerce degree in Mumbai around May 2003. Around February 2004 the Defendant asked the Plaintiff to go to Toronto, Canada to teach classes at the Defendant?s dance school. The Plaintiff agreed. 24. In Toronto, the Defendant had partnered with a. third party organization to handle the day to day operations and administration of the dance school for him as he was only in Toronto part of the time. The Plaintiff shared an apartment with the staff of the other organization. The Defendant?s dance school paid the rent for the apartment. The Plaintiff was paid $8 per hour for teaching classes at the Defendant?s dance school. He was also given a food allowance of $200 per month. After a couple of months the Plaintiff observed that the partner organization appeared to be mismanaging the classes and administration of the dance school. The Plaintiff reported his concerns to the Defendant. The Defendant decided to dissolve the partnership with the third party and to run the Toronto dance school himself. The Defendant asked the Plaintiff to set up a new Toronto of?ce for the Defendant?s dance school and to assist the Defendant in setting up classes and rebranding the dance school. The Plaintiff did so and did administrative and ?nancial of?ce work for the Defendant. He was not paid for his of?ce work. 25. The Defendant then told the Plaintiff that he would bring him to Vancouver and the Plaintiff could work as an instructor at the Defendant?s dance school in Vancouver, which at that time was called Dancing Lights Entertainment. The Plaintiff agreed and moved to Vancouver around September 2004. 26. After the Plaintiff arrived in Vancouver the Plaintiff was told that he could only teach on average four hour long classes per week for $8 per hour. The Defendant told the Plaintiff that he should be grateful for the chance to be in Vancouver. The Plaintiff was also required to work on a daily basis in the Defendant?s Vancouver office doing ?nancial and administrative work and helping to grow the Defendant?s dance business in Vancouver. The Plaintiff was not paid for his of?ce work. 27. When the Plaintiff moved to Vancouver most of the members of the Defendant?s spiritual group VRRP Spiritual Learning were already living in Vancouver. They had been directed by the group?s leader Ms. Bhavnagri to move from India to a speci?c area in North Vancouver, in order to avoid What the group believed was an imminent apocalypse. The Defendant had also relocated to North Vancouver as a group leader. The members of the group, which at that time numbered about 70 or so, all lived in a small area around Lonsdale in North Vancouver at the direction of Ms. Bhavnagri. The Plaintiff initially rented a room in a house owned by a group member and then moved into the basement at the Defendant?s house. The Plaintiff attended regular weekly group meetings and continued to be very involved with the spiritual group. 28. The Defendant regularly travelled from Vancouver to Toronto, to India, and around the world for his dance schools and performances. Whenever the Defendant was in the same city as the Plaintiff, initially Toronto and then Vancouver, the Defendant continued to interact with the Plaintiff in the same physical and sexual way as he had. in India. Among other things the Defendant: created a small core group or clique of mostly male dancers around him, as he had at the dance school in India, and included the Plaintiff in this small group; frequently kissed the Plaintiff on the mouth and touched the Plaintiff's body including his genitalia over top of his clothing; (0) frequently touched the Plaintiff in a ?irtatious way in dance classes and rehearsals. (the ?Further Sexual Demands?) 29. After the Plaintiff moved to Vancouver the Defendant also became much more spiritual and controlling of the Plaintiff than he had in India, using his position as a leader of the VRRP spiritual group to influence all aspects of the Plaintiffs life. 30. The spiritual group required. its members to attend self-analysis sessions with a group leader about once a month. At one such session about 6 months after the Plaintiff moved to Vancouver the Plaintiff was asked by a group leader if there was anything the Plaintiff did not like about the Defendant. The Plaintiff praised the Defendant but said he didn?t like that the Defendant was not paying him for the hours he worked in the Defendant?s of?ce doing ?nancial and administrative work. and also that the Defendant was paying his Indian dance instructors and employees less than what they were reported to have been paid on government applications for foreign workers. After that, the Plaintiff was told by the Defendant and the other group leaders that he had to leave the spiritual group. He was immediately ostracised by all the group members. The Defendant told the Plaintiff he had to move out of the Defendant?s basement and removed the Plaintiff as a dance instructor so he had no income from teaching. The Plaintiff was devastated by the Defendant?s actions. 31. Several months later the Defendant. approached the Plaintiff and told him that he was doing better Spiritually, and that if the Plaintiff apologized to everyone he might have hurt or wrongly in?uenced then he could come back into the spiritual group. The Plaintiff was confused as to whom he had wrongly in?uenced but deferred to the Defendant as his spiritual leader. Under the Defendant?s direction the Plaintiff apologized to certain group members and said that he was wrong to say anything negative about the Defendant or VRRP. He was then permitted to rejoin the group. 32. Sometime after the Plaintiff was taken back into the group, the Plaintiff?s girlfriend Ira came out from India to study in Vancouver. She was also a member of the VRRP spiritual group. With the permission of the group leaders the Plaintiff and Ira moved into a house together. Later that year the Plaintiff brother, also a member of the group, came to Vancouver and with the permission of the group leaders moved into the house with the Plaintiff and Ira. 33. After Ira moved to Vancouver, the Defendant took steps to separate the Plaintiff from his girlfriend and to try to strengthen the bond between the Plaintiff and the Defendant. The Defendant would tell the Plaintiff that ha was not right for him and that the Defendant understood him better than Ira. Sometimes he would say that the Plaintiff cared more about Ira than him, and he would act upset. All of this was very confusing and stressful for the Plaintiff. He was afraid that if he displeased the Defendant in some way then the Defendant would have the Plaintiff thrown out of the spiritual group again. The Plaintiff did not want to experience that again. 34-. Other spiritual group leaders with whom the Defendant was in regular contact would also tell the Plaintiff that his girlfriend was in?uencing hirn wrongly and that he was falling spiritually and impressed upon him that he should break up with her. Fearful of displeasing the Defendant and afraid he would be thrown out of the spiritual group again, the Plaintiff eventually broke up with his girlfriend. She was immediately ostracised by all members of the group was not permitted by the group leaders to continue living in the house with the Plaintiff and his brother. Final Sexual Incident 35. After the Plaintiff broke up with Ira he had one ?nal physical encounter with the Defendant, sometime in early 2008. The Plaintiff was alone in a room with the Defendant in the basement of the Defendant?s house. The Defendant brought out a massage instrument. He began to use it over the Plaintiff?s clothing on his genitals. He attempted to masturbate the Plaintiff while telling him not to get aroused (?the Final. Sexual Incident?). At that point another person came down the stairs towards the room and the Defendant stopped what he was doing. The Plaintiff left immediately. He thought the situation was wrong and in his mind questioned the Defendant?s motives and behaviour. Plaintiff leaves VRRP Spiritual Group 36. After the Defendant and the group leaders threw lra out of the spiritual group the Plaintiff began to question in his own mind the teachings of the Defendant and the spiritual group. He thought the treatment of Ira was wrong and not at all spiritual. He stopped going to the self?analysis sessions and only occasionally attended group meetings. Around the beginning of 2007 the Plaintiff told the Defendant that he was leaving the group. The Defendant told the Plaintiff not to leave the group but to take a break from it for a while. 10 37. The Final Sexual Incident with the Defendant in 2008' was the last straw for the Plaintiff. He left the spiritual group for good. 38. After the Plaintiff left the group he eventually reconciled with Ira in 2008; about 18 months after she was thrown out of the spiritual group. They subsequently married. 39. Around the summer of 2008, after the Plaintiff reconciled with Ira, the Defendant approached the Plaintiff and Ira asking them to rejoin the spiritual group. The Defendant said that he was leading the group and that the Plaintiff and Ira would be welcomed back. They refused. A few days later the Defendant telephoned the Plaintiff and asked the Plaintiff to come to see him alone. The Plaintiff met the Defendant and the Defendant once again asked him to rejoin the spiritual group. The Plaintiff refused and told the Defendant not to discuss the Plaintiff or Ira with other members of the group, including the Plaintiff? 3 mother and brother who were still members. 40. The Defendant continues to exert in?uence over the Plaintiff?s brother who remains in the spiritual group. The Plaintiff recently disclosed to his brother why he left the spiritual group and the physical abuses he suffered from. the Defendant. The Defendant persuaded the Plaintiff brother that he was innocent of the accusations and that the Plaintiff was making them up. This has resulted in an estrangernent between the brothers and their families and created stresses in the Plaintiff?s relationship with his parents and particularly with his mother. 41. As a result of the Defendant?s sexual exploitation and/or sexual assaults the Plaintiff has suffered injury and damage and, Without limiting the generality of the foregoing: he has had difficulty entering into adult sexual relationships; he has difficulty with people in positions of authority; he is distrustful and apprehensive of religious leaders; his relationship with his girlfriend was undermined and destroyed for a period of time; 11 his relationship with his parents and with his brother has been undermined; he has anxiety about the safety and security of his own children; he has had dif?culty forming close relationships; he has suffered from a continuing sense of guilt, and humiliation and embarrassment; he has suffered from an inability to express emotions; and he has suffered. from feelings of lack of self?worth and low self-esteem and fear of public humiliation. 42. The Plaintiff has and will continue to incur expenses in obtaining proper and counselling and treatment. 43. As a result of the injuries referred to in paragraph 41 the Plaintiff has: (0) PART 2: foregone educational and career opportunities; suffered a loss of employment income; and suffered loss of enjoyment of life. RELIEF SOUGHT l. The Plaintiff seeks: (C) (6) general damages; aggravated damages; punitive damages; special damages; loss of past earnings; 12 loss of future earning capacity; recovery of past and future costs of health care services attributable to the sexual exploitation and/or sexual assaults; costs; and interest pursuant to the Court Order Interest Act, RSBC 1996 c. 79 PART 3: LEGAL BASIS l. The Defendant was the Plaintiff 3 teacher, employer and spiritual advisor and was trusted by the Plaintiff. 2. As such, the Defendant had a position of power and authority over the Plaintiff and had control over all aspects of the Plaintiff?s life including personal, professional, ?nancial and Spiritual. 3. The Sexual Advances, Further Sexual Advances, Sexual Demandsa Further Sexual Demands and the Final Sexual Incident (collectively, the ?Sexual Acts?) were sexual assaults perpetrated by the Defendant?s manipulation and abuse of power and authority, Without the Plaintiff" consent. 4. Alternatively, the Plaintiff?s consent to the Sexual Acts was not meaningful and was elicited by the exploitation of power and trust arising from the Defendant?s position and authority as the Plaintiff teacher, employer and spiritual teacher and advisor, which authority the Defendant used to get the Plaintiff to submit to his sexual demands and the Sexual Acts. 5. The factors giving rise to aggravated damages are: the Defendant used his position as teacher and spiritual adviser to manipulate the Plaintiff into submitting to the Sexual Acts; the Defendant abused his authority as a spiritual advisor for the purpose of furthering his own sexual desires; and 13 the Defendant has disparaged the Plaintiff to his family and to the community for the purpose of covering up his. own sexual misconduct. 6. The Plaintiff claims for the recovery of the past and future cost of health care services attributable to the sexual assaults, pursuant to the Health Care Costs Recovery Act, SBC 2008, 27. 7. The Plaintiff seeks costs pursuant to Rule 14.1 of the Supreme Court Rules. ADDRESS FOR SERVICE: Address for service: Cooper Litigation 540 220 Cambie Street Vancouver, BC V68 2M9 Attention: Robert W. Cooper Email address for service: rcooper@cooperlitigation.ca DATED: May 6, 2015 Robert ooer Counsel for the Plaint Rule 7-1 (1) of the Supreme Court Civil Rules states: 1. Unless all parties of record consent or the court otherwise orders, each party of record to an action must, within 35 days after the end of the pleading period, prepare a list of documents in Form 22 that lists all documents that are or have been in the party?s possession or control and that could, if available, he used by any party at trial to prove or disprove a material fact, and (ii) all other documents to which the party intends to refer at trial, and serve the list on all parties of record. 14 ENBORSEMENT 0N GREGINATING PLEADING 0R PETETION FOR SERVICE OUTSIDE BRETISH COLUMBIA The Plaintiff, Jimmy Nowzer Mistry, claims the right to serve this pleading on the Defendant, Shiamak Davar, outside British Columbia on the grounds that it concerns a tort committed in British Columbia. 15 APPENBEX PART I: SUMMARY 0F NATURE OF CLAIM: 1. Damages for sexual assault PART 2: THIS CLAIM ARISES FROM THE FOLLOWING: A personal injury arising out of: a motor vehicle accident medical malpractice another cause A dispute concerning: contaminated sites construction defects real property (real estate) personal property the provision of goods or services or other general commercial matters investment losses the lending of money an employment relationship a will or other issues concerning the probate of an estate a matter not listed here PART 3: THIS CLAIM INVOLVES: a class action maritime law aboriginal law constitutional law 16 PART 4: can?ict of laws none of the above do not. know ENACTMENTS 17