Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

PRACTICE

Canada Post Corp. v. Varma

T-498-99

Dawson J.

9/6/00

17 pp.

Vexatious proceedings--Application to have respondent declared vexatious litigant in Federal Court of Canada under Federal Court Act, s. 40--On proceeding to declare respondent vexatious litigant, Court entitled to take notice of own records, of proceedings contained therein--Respondent unionized employee of Canada Post, dismissed three times during tenure with Corporation--Since 1991, respondent commenced number of proceedings in Federal Court against Minister of Labour, Canada Labour Relations Board, Canadian Human Rights Commission, Canada Post Corporation and Privacy Commissioner--Some proceedings commenced in Court of Appeal--Respondent has not met with success at either level of Federal Court in any of proceedings--Order under s. 40(1) extraordinary remedy--However, in appropriate cases, necessary in order to maintain respect for judicial process, to protect others from frivolous, pointless litigation--Respondent's behaviour in and out of court held to be relevant--Respondent made complaint to Canadian Judicial Council against conduct of judge of Trial Division who dismissed application--Made allegations of dishonesty on part of judges of Federal Court--Attempted to re-litigate issues in proceedings brought in Federal Court--Distributed court documents to parties unrelated to proceedings for purposes extraneous to litigation--Respondent declared vexatious litigant in Ontario, subject of order under R. 51.1 of Rules of Supreme Court of Canada--Has persistently instituted vexatious proceedings, or has conducted proceeding in vexatious manner--Appropriate case to grant relief requested--Applicant awarded costs of application in amount of $5,000--Federal Court Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. F-7, s. 40 (as am. by S.C. 1990, c. 8, s. 11)--Rules of the Supreme Court of Canada, SOR/83-74, R. 51.1 (as enacted by SOR/96-393, s. 1).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.