Canada Case Law

Sandhu v. Canada (College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultant)

Court

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court correctly applied the vexatious litigant framework and made no legal or palpable overriding factual errors in finding the appellant's repeated, irrelevant and scandalous allegations and disregard for orders justified regulating his access to court; the dismissed action lacked merit; the motion to admit the Privacy Commissioner letter was not properly before the court so no procedural fairness breach occurred; comments about ongoing judicial review did not create a reasonable apprehension of bias; and the costs orders were within discretion.

Source excerpt

• Vexatious litigant
• Judicial review
• Procedural fairness
• Reasonable apprehension of bias
• Attorney general consent under s.40
• Costs

Read case analysis

CTCMPAO v. Yan

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a vexatious litigant order, finding no reversible error in the application judge’s s. 140 analysis.

• Vexatious litigant
• Courts of justice act s.140
• Costs
• Vexatious-litigant
• Courts-of-justice-act-s-140

Read case analysis

Anderson v. Double M Construction Ltd.

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The stay application was dismissed because the appellant failed to meet the low merits threshold and the balance of convenience favoured the respondents; however, a limited temporary stay of the vacant possession order until March 31, 2026 was granted to mitigate relocation hardship.

Source excerpt

• Repudiation
• Forfeiture of interest
• Vacant possession
• Summary trial (rule 9-7)
• Stay of execution
• Security for costs

Read case analysis

Pyne v. British Columbia (Information and Privacy Commissioner)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court upheld an OIPC ruling that Derek Pyne abused FIPPA processes through repeated, duplicative requests and grievance-driven submissions, and rejected his fairness and reasonableness challenges.

• Abuse of process
• Fippa
• Procedural fairness
• Reasonableness review
• Ex proprio motu proceedings
• Vexatious litigant

Read case analysis

Lover-Peace v. Erickson

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal held the NOCC, while containing prolix, evidentiary and irrelevant material, nonetheless discloses reasonable causes of action and was wrongly struck in its entirety; the correct remedy was to strike specified irrelevant and evidentiary portions under R.9-5(1)(b), set aside the abuse of process finding under R.9-5(1)(d), and remit the matter to the Supreme Court with directions to file an amended NOCC within 30 days.

Source excerpt

• Striking pleadings
• Abuse of process
• Leave to amend
• Negligence
• Intentional infliction of mental suffering
• Charter s.7

Read case analysis

Larkings v. Forrington

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The ACSA's cessation of registration and administrative assessment terminated enforcement in Australia but did not extinguish the BC Order in British Columbia; the Father attorned to BC jurisdiction by initiating the proceedings; under the Divorce Act the BC court has territorial competence and, applying CJPTA s.11 factors, the court should exercise jurisdiction rather than decline in favour of Australia; the Father's applications to stay, vacate the BC Order and to have the Mother declared vexatious are dismissed.

Source excerpt

• Child support
• Enforcement of foreign maintenance orders
• Jurisdiction and territorial competence
• Forum non conveniens
• Registration of overseas maintenance liabilities
• Vexatious litigant

Read case analysis

Dion v. Whitemark Business Services Ltd.

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

On a highly deferential review under s.29 the Court found no error in the justice's exercise of discretion to impose conditions including a $7,500 posting given serious concerns about the appeal's merits and the appellant's conduct; the appellant failed to comply and gave no realistic assurance security would be posted within an acceptable time; where an appeal lacks merit and the appellant will not post security, dismissal as abandoned is in the interests of justice.

Source excerpt

• Extension of time
• Security for costs
• Dismissal for non‑compliance/abandonment
• Vexatious litigant
• Stay and priority in enforcement

Read case analysis

Papouchine v. College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court declared Alexandre Papouchine a vexatious litigant, stayed his Federal Court proceedings, and imposed a leave requirement, but did not dismiss the underlying judicial review.

• Vexatious litigant
• Section 40 federal courts act
• Leave to proceed
• Access to court
• Discrimination
• Accommodation for disability

Read case analysis

Martin v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed Maria Martin’s application for leave to file another civil claim, finding it time-barred, abusive, and barred by an existing vexatious litigant order.

• Vexatious litigant
• Leave to commence proceedings
• Abuse of process
• Limitation period
• Costs (special)
• Vexatious-litigant

Read case analysis

Kiss v. Canada (Attorney General)

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court awarded special costs against Zsolt Kiss in one action, Scale B costs to two defendants in another, and no costs to the Singer defendants.

• Special costs
• Rule 9-5
• Rule 9-6
• Section 18 supreme court act
• Vexatious litigant
• Harassment

Read case analysis