Blake v. Ahmed

Blake v. Ahmed

The chambers judge correctly found the appellant's claims were meritless and premised on discredited pseudo-legal theories, and therefore there was no genuine issue for trial; summary dismissal under Rule 9-6 was appropriate and the appeal raises no reviewable error.

Citation
2025 BCCA 384
Parties
Appellant (plaintiff): Daniel E. Blake; Respondent (defendant): Amr Ahmed; Respondent (other): The Attorney General of Canada on Behalf of His Majesty the King in Right of Canada as Represented by the Minister of National Revenue; Respondent (defendant): The Toronto-Dominion Bank
Court
British Columbia Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
30 October 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal From Summary Dismissal / Appeal From Chambers Judge Summary Judgment Under Rule 9 6
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Garnishment/request to Pay, Theft, Fraud, Negligence, Costs, Pseudo Legal/sovereign Citizen Arguments
Source Language
English
Tort Civil Procedure Taxation Banking Summary Judgment Garnishment/request to Pay Theft Fraud +3 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 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Daniel E. Blake

Appellant (plaintiff)

Amr Ahmed

Respondent (defendant)

The Attorney General of Canada on Behalf of His Majesty the King in Right of Canada as Represented by the Minister of National Revenue

Respondent (other)

The Toronto-Dominion Bank

Respondent (defendant)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal From Summary Dismissal / Appeal From Chambers Judge Summary Judgment Under Rule 9 6

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the chambers judge erred in summarily dismissing claims under Rule 9-6
  2. 2 Whether the garnishment (Request to Pay) and transfer of funds by TD to CRA constituted theft or fraud
  3. 3 Whether TD is liable in negligence for complying with the RTP

Ratio Decidendi

The chambers judge correctly found the appellant's claims were meritless and premised on discredited pseudo-legal theories, and therefore there was no genuine issue for trial; summary dismissal under Rule 9-6 was appropriate and the appeal raises no reviewable error.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Dispense with need for appellant to endorse form of order