Qualizza v. Canada (the King)

Qualizza v. Canada (the King)

The Statement of Claim failed to plead material facts supporting the alleged Charter breaches or tort claims and contained bald, vexatious and abusive allegations; consequently it did not disclose a reasonable cause of action and must be struck without leave to amend. The Court declined to exercise residual jurisdiction given the comprehensive statutory CAF grievance regime and the absence of exceptional circumstances.

Citation
2024 FC 1801
Parties
Plaintiffs: FRANCESCO GABRIELE QUALIZZA et al.; Defendants: HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF CANADA et al.
Court
Federal Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 November 2024
Procedural Posture
Mass Tort and Constitutional Challenge (charter) / Motion to Strike Under Rule 221; Judgment Striking Statement of Claim
Outcome
Motion allowed. Statement of Claim struck in its entirety without leave to amend. Court declines to exercise residual jurisdiction. Costs awarded to Canada.
Legal Topics
Charter Rights, Freedom of Religion, Freedom of Association, Section 7 (life, Liberty, Security), Privacy (s.8), Equality (s.15), Misfeasance in Public Office, Grievance Process Jurisdiction, Motion to Strike Under Rule 221
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Tort Law Civil Procedure Military Law Charter Rights Freedom of Religion Freedom of Association +6 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 7 Authorities cited 21 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FRANCESCO GABRIELE QUALIZZA et al.

Plaintiffs

HIS MAJESTY THE KING IN RIGHT OF CANADA et al.

Defendants

Procedural Posture

Mass Tort and Constitutional Challenge (charter) / Motion to Strike Under Rule 221; Judgment Striking Statement of Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Statement of Claim discloses a reasonable cause of action
  2. 2 Whether the pleading is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious
  3. 3 Whether the pleading constitutes an abuse of process

Ratio Decidendi

The Statement of Claim failed to plead material facts supporting the alleged Charter breaches or tort claims and contained bald, vexatious and abusive allegations; consequently it did not disclose a reasonable cause of action and must be struck without leave to amend. The Court declined to exercise residual jurisdiction given the comprehensive statutory CAF grievance regime and the absence of exceptional circumstances.

Court Disposition

Motion allowed. Statement of Claim struck in its entirety without leave to amend. Court declines to exercise residual jurisdiction. Costs awarded to Canada.

Orders

  • The motion is allowed.
  • The action is struck without leave to amend.