Canada Case Law

Perry v. General Motors of Canada

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

Perry demonstrated an inability to focus on the real issues, repeatedly failed to comply with timelines, and persistently commenced and continued vexatious proceedings by bringing prolix, repetitive and unsupported allegations of fraud and misconduct; accordingly a s.22 order was warranted to prevent further abuse of this Court's process, with specified leave conditions and narrow exceptions.

Source excerpt

• Vexatious proceedings
• Access to courts
• Security for costs
• Abuse of process
• Leave to appeal
• Case management

Read case analysis

Tafti v. Davis

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed an extension-of-time application and granted a tailored s. 22 vexatious proceedings order against the appellant.

• Extension of time
• Inactive list
• Vexatious proceedings order (s.22 court of appeal act)
• Compliance with court rules and time limits
• Section 164 strata property act
• Credibility assessment

Read case analysis

Richardson v. Seventh-Day Adventist Church

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court dismissed Dale Richardson’s Rule 51 appeal from a prothonotary’s scheduling order and refused to interfere with case management directions.

• Extension of time
• Case management
• Scheduling order
• Rule 51 appeal
• Rule 40 federal courts act (vexatious proceedings)
• Appeal-procedure

Read case analysis

E.A.L. v. H.M.G.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

Post-trial family law applications: support was varied retroactive to September 1, 2008, mobility to Prince Edward Island was allowed, and the contempt application was dismissed.

• Variation of support orders
• Arrears
• Contempt standards
• Child mobility
• Guardianship and joint guardianship
• Disclosure obligations

Read case analysis

Kalevar v. McTeague

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Court dismissed the appeal, confirmed Ferrier J.'s order declaring the appellant a vexatious litigant, upheld the stay of his prior proceedings and the requirement that he obtain leave of a Superior Court judge (on notice to affected parties) before instituting further proceedings, and fixed costs of the appeal at $5,000; no rule requires awaiting conclusion of other proceedings before making a vexatious litigant declaration.

Source excerpt

• Vexatious litigant declaration
• Stay of proceedings
• Leave to commence proceedings
• Judicial bias allegations
• Costs assessment

Read case analysis

D.K.H. v. M.M.H.

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court granted a vexatious-proceedings order under s. 18, barring further applications without leave after repeated, largely unmeritorious family law motions.

• Custody
• Child support
• Spousal support
• Variation/reconsideration
• Vexatious litigant order
• Leave to institute proceedings

Read case analysis

H. (T. J.) v. H. (C. C.)

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal as abandoned for lateness, barred further filings without leave under s. 29, awarded costs to the respondent, and declined to hold the appellant’s father liable.

• Custody and access
• Extension of time to appeal
• Leave to appeal
• Section 15 family relations act report
• Restraining orders on filing without leave
• Indigent status

Read case analysis

Kerr v. Children's Aids Society of Lanark

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The motion was dismissed with costs because the appellants failed to provide a persuasive explanation for the unexplained delay following the extension of time and failed to demonstrate the appeal's merit; accordingly the court declined to vary the prior appellate order or set aside the Registrar's dismissal for delay.

Source excerpt

• Appeal delay
• Abuse of process
• Vexatious proceedings
• Extension of time
• Dismissal for delay
• Rule 61.16(6)

Read case analysis