SHARIFI-ZANJANI v MACEWAN UNIVERSITY, 2019 ABQB 845
3.68: Court options to deal with significant deficiencies
13.7: Pleadings: other requirements
The Plaintiff filed a Statement of Claim alleging defamation. Court personnel identified that the Action presented as a possible Apparently Vexatious Application or Proceeding, engaging Civil Practice Note No. 7 (“CPN7”).
In reviewing the Statement of Claim, Associate Chief Justice Nielsen noted a failure to plead defamation with sufficient particularity to meet the requirements of Rule 13.7. In fact, His Lordship observed that “the Statement of Claim does not indicate what was published, how it was published, where it was published, when it was published, and very importantly, who made and/or published the allegedly defamatory statements.” Moreover, the Plaintiff sought remedies that were excessive, impossible, or disproportionate.
Associate Chief Justice Nielsen concluded that the Statement of Claim should be subjected to a show-cause document-based review under Rule 3.68 and CPN7. In directing summary procedures, Associate Chief Justice Nielsen raised several questions requiring the Plaintiff’s specific response.View CanLII Details