3.15: Originating application for judicial review
3.68: Court options to deal with significant deficiencies
9.4: Signing judgments and orders
13.5: Variation of time periods

Case Summary

The Plaintiff filed an Originating Application for Judicial Review of the decision of the Law Society of Alberta’s Appeal Committee in addition to two other Applications. Associate Chief Justice Rooke considered the Originating Application under Civil Practice Note No. 7 (“CPN7”) which deals with Actions that could be considered an Apparently Vexatious Application or Proceeding (“AVAP”).

The Respondents argued that the Originating Application should be reviewed under CPN7 in part because the Originating Application was not filed within six months after the date of the decision as required by Rule 3.15.

His Lordship confirmed that the Originating Application was out of time because, while Rule 13.5 provides the Court with the ability to extend a time period specified in the Rules, Rule 3.15 prohibits such extension for Applications for Judicial Review. Furthermore, His Lordship found that the Originating Application provided no basis for Judicial Review, appeared to be hopeless and abuse of Court processes because it sought impossible or disproportionate remedies, and identified issues regarding standing of the Applicant.

Pursuant to CPN7, Associate Chief Justice Rooke ordered that the Applicant had 14 days to provide written submissions to the Court to “show cause” as to why the AVAP should not be struck pursuant to Rule 3.68. His Lordship noted that pursuant to Rule 9.4, the Plaintiff’s approval of the Interim Order was not required.

View CanLII Details