UBAH v UBAH, 2023 ABCA 143


14.5: Appeals only with permission

Case Summary


This was an Application for permission to challenge the constitutionality of certain Decisions of the Court of King’s Bench. Since the Applicant had previously been declared a vexatious litigant, permission was required to Appeal, pursuant to Rule 14.5(1)(j).

At first instance, the Applicant also sought to challenge the constitutionality or validity of Rules 14.5(1)(j) and 14.5(4); however, the lower Court had declined to hear the question due to jurisdictional concerns relating to the Rules’ applicability to Appeals only.

Regarding the Applicant’s challenge to the previous Decisions, the Court of Appeal confirmed the lower Court’s conclusion that the Applicant’s proposed constitutional challenges to the previous Decisions amounted to an impermissible collateral attack and abuse of process. Accordingly, permission to Appeal was refused.

Regarding the Applicant’s challenge to Rules 14.5(1)(j) and 14.5(4), the Court of Appeal held that the lower Court had understated its jurisdiction by declining to hear the Applicant’s challenge. Despite the lower Court’s error, the Court declined permission to Appeal on the basis that the proposed challenge had no air of reality and that it would be inappropriate to permit the issue to be argued by a self-represented, vexatious litigant.

In the result, the Application was dismissed.

View CanLII Details