CANADIAN IMPERIAL BANK OF COMMERCE v HAYDEN, 2021 ABQB 647
10.49: Penalty for contravening rules
13.7: Pleadings: other requirements
14.5: Appeals only with permission
The self-represented Defendant had a lengthy and problematic history of litigation in the Alberta courts. This led to the Court requiring the Defendant to obtain leave prior to filing commencement documents in the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench. The Defendant submitted a 144-page Affidavit, sworn by herself, to Rooke ACJ asking for permission to file a Counterclaim for a debt collection action initiated by Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce.
Rooke ACJ considered the test for leave to file as stated in Re Thompson, 2018 ABQB 87. On the facts, Rooke ACJ found that the Defendant’s proposed Counterclaim was an abuse of Court processes. One of the defects with the Counterclaim was that the Defendant claimed she was defamed but did not plead the particulars of the alleged defamation as required by Rule 13.7(f).
Pursuant to Rule 14.5(4), there is no appeal to the Alberta Court of Appeal on an Order denying a vexatious litigant from initiating proceedings. Rooke ACJ cautioned the Defendant that Rule 10.49(1) permits it to order that she pay a penalty if she continues to file abusive leave to file Applications.View CanLII Details