In an underlying Action alleging harassment (the “Action”) commenced by a radio announcer (the “Plaintiff”) against one of her listeners, the Applicant/Defendant, John Schumacher (“Mr. Schumacher”), had previously made an Application (the “Application”) which Associate Chief Justice Rooke ruled to exhibit several indicia of abusive litigation. His Lordship had imposed interim Court access restrictions on Mr. Schumacher and invited him and the Plaintiff to provide written submissions addressing two questions: (1) whether Mr. Schumacher should be subject to indefinite Court access restrictions; and (2) if so, what form those Court access restrictions should take.

Because Mr. Schumacher had attempted to bring the Plaintiff’s employer, a radio station and its owner (the “Radio Station” and the “Owner”, respectively) into the litigation, they were also invited to make submissions. The Court received no submissions from the Plaintiff or Mr. Schumacher but did receive a joint submission from the Radio Station and Owner (the “Owner’s Submission”).

After reviewing the relevant procedural history and the Owner’s Submission, Associate Chief Justice Rooke found that the circumstances of the case, in particular the concern for the safety of Ms. Stewart, weighed in favour of indefinite Court access restrictions as against Mr. Schumacher. His Lordship provided a litany of prohibitions and restrictions as against Mr. Schumacher which included a requirement that Mr. Schumacher must apply to a single Appeal Judge for leave to commence or continue any Appeal, Application, or other proceeding in the Alberta Court of Appeal, and if a single Appeal Judge granted Mr. Schumacher leave to commence an Appeal, then Mr. Schumacher may be required to apply for further permission to Appeal under Rule 14.5(1)(j).

His Lordship concluded by noting that the Court would prepare and file the appropriate Order to reflect this Decision, and that approval of that Order by Mr. Schumacher was not required.