ZARATE v BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA

The Plaintiff commenced an Action in Alberta seeking approximately $17.5 million in damages arising from criminal proceedings in Nova Scotia, the seizure and sale of a vehicle, and the alleged cancellation of his passport. Certain Defendants requested review of the Amended Statement of Claim under Civil Practice Note 7 (“CPN7”).

CPN7 sets out summary procedures, using Rule 3.68, for the Court to assess a claim, defence, action, application, or proceeding that appears on its face to be frivolous, vexatious, or otherwise an abuse of process.

Justice Reed found that, on its face, the Amended Statement of Claim appeared frivolous, vexatious, or an abuse of process, and held that this was one of the exceptional cases in which the CPN7 process should be used.

The Court identified multiple deficiencies, including apparent limitation issues, serious jurisdictional concerns, possible res judicata and collateral attack problems arising from related proceedings in other jurisdictions, failure to plead the essential elements of malicious prosecution, and claims that appeared to fall outside the Court’s jurisdiction.

The Court issued an Apparent Vexatious Application or Proceeding Notice directing the Plaintiff to file written submissions addressing the identified concerns. The Action remained stayed pending receipt of those submissions, after which the Court would determine whether the Amended Statement of Claim should be struck out in whole or in part under Rule 3.68.