3.68: Court options to deal with significant deficiencies

Case Summary

Michalyshyn J. reviewed three Statements of Claim filed by the Plaintiff, Lemay, after being alerted that the claims were Apparently Vexatious Applications or Proceedings (“AVAPs”). Civil Practice Note No. 7 allows the Court to review an AVAP and determine whether it is unmeritorious and has no prospect of success, or is otherwise abusive and vexatious as per Rule 3.68. If any of these criteria are met, the Court will issue a decision identifying the apparent defects which could allow the Court to strike the filing under Rule 3.68. The filing party then has an opportunity to submit written submissions within 14 days to explain why the filing is legitimate and should be maintained.

The Court found that all three of the Statements of Claims filed by Lemay exhibited defects demonstrating abusive or vexatious litigation. None of the three claims contained any particulars of the breaches alleged by Lemay; they simply contained “bald allegations” of “breach of contract” or “theft of services.” Michalyshyn J. confirmed that neither Courts nor litigants are obliged to respond to an Action or an Application where the facts and issues are not identified or discernable.

Michalyshyn J. then stayed the Statements of Claim and invited written submissions from both Lemay and the Defendants named in the Statements of Claim. Following receipt and review of the written submissions, the Court would then determine whether all or any of the Statements of Claim will be struck pursuant to Rule 3.68.

View CanLII Details