Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Civil procedure – Vexatious litigants – Whether the lower courts erred in granting and upholding the order denying the applicant’s request for adjournment and declaring the applicant to be a vexatious litigant – Whether the application judge erred in law in denying the applicant natural justice – Whether the application judge erred in law by exceeding jurisdiction and sanctioning service of the application record on the applicant by email, in the absence of any request that the application record be served other than in accordance with the rules – Whether the application judge erred in considering there to be urgency to the hearing of the application because of a perceived need to prevent the upcoming motion hearings – Whether the application judge erred by failing to find that the application was a malicious prosecution – Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43, s. 140.

The applicant, Mr. Chen, was involved in a motor vehicle accident. He issued a claim against his own insurer for additional accident benefits to be paid and started a tort action against those responsible for the accident. The respondent law firm of Howie, Sacks and Henry LLP were Mr. Chen’s counsel when his accident benefits claim settled. The respondent law firm of Singer Kwinter were Mr. Chen’s counsel when his tort claim was settled.

Following the settlement of his tort action, Mr. Chen began various proceedings against some of his previous lawyers, including the respondent law firms, in relation to the handling of his claims. None of these proceedings have been successful. The respondent law firms applied to the Ontario Superior Court for an order declaring Mr. Chen a vexatious litigant. Mr. Chen sought to have the application adjourned due to illness.