Noddle v. Canada
- Citation
- 2016 FC 969
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 25 August 2016
- Posture
- Civil Action / Motion to Strike Statements of Claim (rule 369)
- Language
- English
More details
- Court
- Federal Court
- Decision
- 25 August 2016
- Posture
- Civil Action / Motion to Strike Statements of Claim (rule 369)
- Language
- English
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
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
PlaintiffHer Majesty the Queen
Defendant Counsel: Christa Hook; William F. Pentney03
Procedural history
Posture
Civil Action / Motion to Strike Statements of Claim (rule 369)
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Whether the statements of claim are an abuse of process
- 02
Whether the court should strike out the statements of claim without leave to amend
- 03
Whether costs should be addressed
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
Legal principles
- 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
- 02
Federal Courts Rules, Rule 369
Motions in writing may be considered under Rule 369 of the Federal Courts Rules
- 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.
Federal Court
Judgment· 25 August 2016
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
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.