DUECK v CALGARY (CITY), 2021 ABQB 510
3.68: Court options to deal with significant deficiencies
The Applicant had previously filed a Statement of Claim which Associate Chief Justice Rooke had ruled to be an Apparently Vexatious Application or Proceeding (“AVAP”), and had ordered, pursuant to Civil Practice Note No 7 (“CPN7”), that the Applicant had 14 days to provide the Court with written submissions to “show cause” as to why the AVAP should not be struck pursuant to Rule 3.68. No written submissions were provided by the deadline, so Associate Chief Justice Rooke determined that the AVAP should be struck pursuant Rule 3.68.
Associate Chief Justice Rooke also ruled that the Applicant’s approval of the Order granted was dispensed with pursuant to Rule 9.4(2)(c).View CanLII Details