Canada Case Law

Jones v. Jones

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court concluded on the whole history of the family proceeding that the claimant habitually and persistently instituted proceedings that were vexatious because she repeatedly sought to relitigate issues already decided, engaged in deliberate and tactical delay, made an egregious misrepresentation to a judge and persisted in the same conduct thereafter, failed to comply with judicial directions and lacked insight; accordingly a limited s.18 order was necessary to prevent further abuse of process while preserving access to justice by requiring leave for new steps or proceedings related to th…

Source excerpt

• Vexatious litigant orders
• Abuse of process
• Summary trial
• Stay applications
• Costs

Read case analysis

Lloyd's Register Canada Ltd. v. Choi

Court

Federal Court

The Federal Court declared Mr. Choi a vexatious litigant under section 40 of the Federal Courts Act and barred new or continuing proceedings without leave, awarding $3,000 costs.

• Vexatious litigant orders
• Leave to proceed
• Costs
• Relitigation
• Court gatekeeping
• Vexatious-litigant-orders

Read case analysis

Eaglestone v. Insurance Council of British Columbia

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The petition was dismissed because the court found no persuasive evidence of remaining undisclosed documents of practical value, the petitioner failed to properly use FIPPA complaint/review mechanisms with the OIPC, mandamus relief was unwarranted given alternative remedies and discretionary considerations, and the petitioner's repetitive and abusive conduct justified interlocutory injunction‑style orders restraining further redundant requests and requiring leave for new requests.

Source excerpt

• Freedom of information and protection of privacy act (fippa)
• Financial institutions act (fia)
• Mandamus
• Vexatious litigant orders
• Inherent jurisdiction
• Office inspection rights

Read case analysis

Ajvazi v. McCormick Law Group ("W.ML.G.") & Associate

Court

Supreme Court of British Columbia

The court dismissed the bias/recusal application as unsupported, struck the 2025 Notice of Civil Claim in its entirety as an abuse of process and dismissed it without leave to amend because it sought to relitigate matters already finally determined (including Ajvazi 2024 and the Earlier Orders), declared the plaintiff a vexatious litigant with narrowly tailored restrictions requiring leave to commence further proceedings related to the same subject matter or against listed parties, and awarded lump sum special costs to rebuke continued collateral attacks.

Source excerpt

• Abuse of process
• Vexatious litigant orders
• Striking pleadings under rule 9-5
• Special costs
• Judicial recusal/bias

Read case analysis

Nielsen v. Beland

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The Court of Appeal allowed Johan Nielsen’s appeal, set aside vexatious litigant and special costs orders, and remitted his costs application for rehearing.

• Procedural fairness
• Ex parte interlocutory relief
• Notice of discontinuance
• Special costs
• Vexatious litigant orders
• Houweling orders

Read case analysis

Szot v. Cozzi

Court

Court of Appeal for Ontario

The Ontario Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal from a vexatious litigant order, finding no reversible error in standing or the application of the Lang Michener test.

• Vexatious litigant orders
• Standing to bring s.140 applications
• Costs
• Protection of parties under disability
• Vexatious-litigant-orders
• Standing

Read case analysis

Pereira v. British Columbia Labour Relations Board

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed an application for pre-appeal disclosure. The court held the requested materials were too speculative or barred by deliberative secrecy.

• Pre-appeal discovery
• Fresh evidence
• Recusal/disqualification
• Vexatious litigant orders
• Deliberative secrecy
• Pre-appeal-discovery

Read case analysis

Duterville c. Canada (Procureur général)

Court

Federal Court

La Cour fédérale autorise Albert Duterville, jadis déclaré plaideur quérulent, à présenter une nouvelle demande de contrôle judiciaire, sous réserve d’une prorogation de délai.

• Vexatious litigant orders
• Leave to proceed under s.40(4)
• Time limitation s.18.1(2)
• Abuse of process
• Procedural fairness
• Vexatious-litigant-orders

Read case analysis

Walker v. Kierans

Court

British Columbia Court of Appeal

The British Columbia Court of Appeal dismissed Kathleen Walker’s appeal from an adjournment refusal and a vexatious litigant order made against her.

• Vexatious litigant orders
• Adjournment
• Procedural fairness
• Leave to commence proceedings
• Vexatious-litigant-orders
• Procedural-fairness

Read case analysis

Oleynik v. Memorial University of Newfoundland

Court

Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal

The Court held that the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador has inherent jurisdiction to impose vexatious litigant orders when necessary to prevent abuse of its processes; on the facts the appellant's pervasive, repetitive, interconnected and meritless litigation, unfounded allegations, defiance of court directions and inappropriate communications amounted to abuse of process warranting the Vexatious Litigant Order; proposed additional evidence was irrelevant or already part of the record and thus not admissible; allegations of procedural unfairness and factual error did not meet the a…

Source excerpt

• Vexatious litigant orders
• Inherent jurisdiction
• Abuse of process
• Procedural fairness
• Admission of additional evidence
• Access to justice

Read case analysis