Case information

Charter of Rights — Civil procedure — Abuse of process — Pleadings — Appeals — Judgments and orders — Summary judgments — Dismissal for delay — Applicant bringing action against university and union in relation to academic complaints and other matters — Motion judge dismissing statement of claim and amended statement of claim — Registrar of Court of Appeal dismissing applicant’s proposed appeal, for reasons of delay — Court of Appeal judge dismissing applicant’s motion seeking reversal of administrative dismissal of appeal — Court of Appeal panel dismissing applicant’s motion to reverse single appellate judge’s decision — Whether application raises legal issue — If so, whether legal issue of sufficient public importance — Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, r. 2.1.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

The applicant commenced an action against his former university in relation to various academic complaints, and to his having been banned from campus. A motion judge granted the university’s motion seeking summary dismissal of the action, concluding that the statement of claim failed to disclose a valid cause of action, and was “frivolous, vexatious or otherwise an abuse of process” pursuant to r. 2.1 of the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure. The applicant then filed an amended statement of claim, this time adding his former union for allegedly failing to properly represent him in his dealings with the university.

The motion judge dismissed the amended statement of claim, again for failing to disclose a valid cause of action and for being frivolous, vexatious or abusive. The registrar at the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s proposed appeal from the motion judge’s decision, for reasons of delay. A single appellate judge at the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s motion seeking to overturn the administrative dismissal of the appeal; and a full panel of the Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant’s motion seeking a reversal of the single appellate judge’s decision.