Canada Judgment

Federal Court

Noddle v. Canada

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The court struck the statements of claim because their allegations were substantially the same as allegations in other proceedings already dismissed as an abuse of process and no response was filed; accordingly strike out without leave to amend and dismissal of the actions was warranted.

Court disposition

Statements of claim in T-1081-16, T-1195-16 and T-1196-16 struck out without leave to amend; actions dismissed; costs addressed in T-1081-16.

Orders

  • The plaintiff’s statements of claim in court file numbers T-1081-16, T-1195-16, and T-1196-16 are struck out without leave to amend.
  • The actions in the above-listed files are dismissed.
  • Costs of the motion have been addressed in court file number T-1081-16.

02

Material facts

Parties

Darren Ross Noddle

Plaintiff

Her Majesty the Queen

Defendant Counsel: Christa Hook; William F. Pentney

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Civil Action / Motion to Strike Statements of Claim (rule 369)

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Defendant moved under Rule 369 to strike out the statements of claim as an abuse of process on the basis that the allegations are substantially the same as in numerous other proceedings that have been dismissed.
Respondent
No responding materials were filed by the plaintiff; no argument was presented in response to the motion.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Common law and Federal Courts Rules

    Court may strike pleadings that constitute an abuse of process and may do so without leave to amend

  2. 02

    Federal Courts Rules, Rule 369

    Motions in writing may be considered under Rule 369 of the Federal Courts Rules

  3. 03

    Order of Prothonotary Mireille Tabib dated August 11, 2016

    Service of motion materials in accordance with a prothonotary's order permits the court to proceed in absence of response

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The court struck the statements of claim because their allegations were substantially the same as allegations in other proceedings already dismissed as an abuse of process and no response was filed; accordingly strike out without leave to amend and dismissal of the actions was warranted.

Court disposition

Statements of claim in T-1081-16, T-1195-16 and T-1196-16 struck out without leave to amend; actions dismissed; costs addressed in T-1081-16.

  • The plaintiff’s statements of claim in court file numbers T-1081-16, T-1195-16, and T-1196-16 are struck out without leave to amend.
  • The actions in the above-listed files are dismissed.
  • Costs of the motion have been addressed in court file number T-1081-16.

Source and reliance status

Federal Court · 25 August 2016

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Federal Court

Judgment· 25 August 2016

2016 FC 969

Noddle v. Canada Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2016-08-25 Neutral citation 2016 FC 969 File numbers T-1196-16 Decision Content Date: 20160825 Docket: T-1196-16 Citation: 2016 FC 969 Ottawa, Ontario, August 25, 2016 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Locke BETWEEN:

DARREN ROSS NODDLE Plaintiff and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Defendant

JUDGMENT AND REASONS [1] UPON motion in writing by the defendant for, among other things, an Order striking out the statements of claim in court file numbers T-1081-16, T-1195-16, and T-1196-16 in their entirety, without leave to amend; [2] AND HAVING considered the defendant’s submissions; [3] AND BEING satisfied that service of the defendant’s motion record was made upon the plaintiff as contemplated in the Order of Prothonotary Mireille Tabib dated August 11, 2016; [4] AND NOTING the absence of any responding motion materials on behalf of the plaintiff served and filed within the delay contemplated by Prothonotary Tabib; [5] AND BEING satisfied that the allegations made in the statements of claim in issue are substantially the same as those made in many other proceedings, before both this Court and other courts, that have been dismissed as an abuse of process;

JUDGMENT THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that: 1. The plaintiff’s statements of claim in court file numbers T-1081-16, T-1195-16, and T-1196-16 are struck out without leave to amend.

2. The actions in the above-listed files are dismissed.

3. Costs of the motion have been addressed in court file number T-1081-16. “George R. Locke” Judge

FEDERAL COURT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: T-1196-16 STYLE OF CAUSE: DARREN ROSS NODDLE v HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN MOTION IN WRITING CONSIDERED AT OTTAWA, ONTARIO PURSUANT TO RULE 369 OF THE FEDERAL COURTS RULES REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT: LOCKE J. DATED: August 25, 2016 SUBMISSIONS: Ms. Christa Hook For The Defendant SOLICITORS OF RECORD: William F. Pentney Deputy Attorney General of Canada Vancouver, British Columbia For The Defendant

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

Federal Courts Rules, Rule 369

Legislation

Legislation referenced in the available case record.

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.