Tsai v. Fantino
The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge correctly found the statement of claim failed to comply with pleading requirements, contained scandalous and irrelevant material, and disclosed no reasonable cause of action; the order striking the claim without leave to amend was affirmed as to the respondents...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- C42021
- Parties
- Appellant: Antony Tsai; Respondent: Julian Fantino; Respondent: Michael Oostwoud; Respondent: Kenneth Petrie
- Court
- Court of Appeal for Ontario
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 24 January 2005
- Procedural Posture
- Civil / Appeal From Superior Court Order Striking Statement of Claim
- Outcome
- Appeal dismissed without costs
- Legal Topics
- Pleadings, Striking Statement of Claim, Scandalous Pleadings, Disclosure of Cause of Action, Leave to Amend
- Source Language
- en
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Antony Tsai
Appellant
Julian Fantino
Respondent
Michael Oostwoud
Respondent
Kenneth Petrie
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Civil / Appeal From Superior Court Order Striking Statement of Claim
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the statement of claim set out a concise statement of material facts as required by the Rules of Civil Procedure
- 2 Whether parts of the statement of claim were legally scandalous or embarrassing and irrelevant to the defendants
- 3 Whether the statement of claim disclosed a reasonable cause of action and whether striking without leave to amend was appropriate
Ratio Decidendi
The appeal was dismissed because the motion judge correctly found the statement of claim failed to comply with pleading requirements, contained scandalous and irrelevant material, and disclosed no reasonable cause of action; the order striking the claim without leave to amend was affirmed as to the respondents appealed against.
Court Disposition
Appeal dismissed without costs
Orders
- Appeal dismissed without costs
- Order striking the statement of claim without leave to amend as to respondents Michael Oostwoud and Kenneth Petrie affirmed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
1 paragraphs
Tsai v. Fantino Collection Decisions of the Court of Appeal Date 2005-01-24 Docket numbers C42021 Judges MacPherson, James C.; Cronk, Eleanore Ann; Lang, Susan Elizabeth Subject Civil Decision Content DATE: 20050124 DOCKET: C42021 COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO RE: ANTONY TSAI (Appellant) – and – JULIAN FANTINO, MICHAEL OOSTWOUD, KENNETH PETRIE (Respondents) BEFORE: MACPHERSON, CRONK and LANG JJ.A. COUNSEL: Antony Tsai the appellant – in‑person Robert J. Baldwin for the respondent HEARD & ENDORSED: January 21, 2005 On appeal from order of Justice Russell G. Juriansz of the Superior Court of Justice dated August 14, 2003. APPEAL BOOK ENDORSEMENT [1] The appellant commenced an action against Chief of Police Julian Fantino and police officers Michael Oostwoud and Kenneth Petrie based on his alleged mistreatment at the Bi‑Way Store at the Jane Finch Mall on March 7, 1997, when he was suspected of shoplifting. [2] On a motion brought by the respondents, Juriansz J. struck out the statement of claim, without leave to amend, and dismissed the action. He did so on three bases: (1) The statement of claim failed to comply with the requirement of the Rules of Civil Procedure that it set out a concise statement of the material facts on which the plaintiff relies; (2) A large part of the statement of claim was legally scandalous and legally embarrassing because of the plaintiff’s many comments, asides and suppositions about individuals other than the defendants had no relevance to his claim against the defendants; and (3) The statement of claim disclosed no reasonable cause of action against any of the three defendants. [3] The appellant does not appeal the component of the motion court judge’s judgment relating to Chief Fantino. With respect to the appeal relating to the other defendants, we agree with the reasons and disposition of Juriansz J. [4] The appeal is dismissed without costs. The order may be entered without formal approval of the appellant.