A document entitled “Demands Application” was submitted to Justice Nielsen as the Justice conducting a Civil Practice Note 7 (“CPN7”) process on a matter that was ultimately struck out as an abuse of the Court process. The Demands Application was a 20-page document seeking, amongst other things, $75 million in damages from “corrupt, terrorizing, tyranny, communistic, illegal, harassing and Discrimination tort-feasors”. The Applicants also disagreed with the results of the CPN7 process.

The Applicants relied on Rule 9.13, which allows a Court to re-open a Decision in limited circumstances, including before an Order is entered. Associate Chief Justice Nielsen stated that the Applicants were too late to rely on Rule 9.13 as the Order had already been entered. His Lordship also noted that the Applicants failed to provide a “good reason” for the Court to revisit the matter, as required by Rule 9.13. The Applicants did not provide Affidavit evidence to support the Application, nor did they identify an error or omission in the CPN7 Decision.

Therefore, Associate Chief Justice Nielsen dismissed the Demands Application and noted that the self-represented Applicants could Appeal the Decision with the Alberta Court of Appeal.