Harrison v. British Columbia (Ministry of the Attorney General)

Harrison v. British Columbia (Ministry of the Attorney General)

The chambers judge applied the correct legal test under Rule 56, concluded the proposed appeal had no prospect of success and was frivolous or an abuse of process (being an attempt to relitigate matters finally decided), and therefore properly denied indigent status; the court refused to vary that order.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2014 BCCA 210
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Robert Glen Harrison; Respondent (defendant): Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia; Respondent (defendant): B.C. Minister of Attorney General; Respondent (defendant): Karen Horsman
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 May 2014
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Application for Indigent Status and Review of Chambers Judge's Denial of Indigent Status
Outcome
Application to vary the chambers judge's order dismissed; indigent status denied.
Legal Topics
Indigent Status, Res Judicata, Abuse of Process, Absolute Privilege, Finality of Judgment, Strike Out
Source Language
english
Civil Procedure Appeals Administrative Law Evidence Law Indigent Status Res Judicata Abuse of Process Absolute Privilege +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Robert Glen Harrison

Appellant (plaintiff)

Her Majesty the Queen in Right of the Province of British Columbia

Respondent (defendant)

B.C. Minister of Attorney General

Respondent (defendant)

Karen Horsman

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Application for Indigent Status and Review of Chambers Judge's Denial of Indigent Status

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the chambers judge erred in denying indigent status
  2. 2 Whether the proposed appeal has any prospect of success or is frivolous or an abuse of process
  3. 3 Whether the subject action impermissibly seeks to relitigate matters finally decided (res judicata)

Ratio Decidendi

The chambers judge applied the correct legal test under Rule 56, concluded the proposed appeal had no prospect of success and was frivolous or an abuse of process (being an attempt to relitigate matters finally decided), and therefore properly denied indigent status; the court refused to vary that order.

Court Disposition

Application to vary the chambers judge's order dismissed; indigent status denied.

Orders

  • Application to vary the chambers judge's order dismissed
  • Application for indigent status dismissed