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 – appeals – Vexatious litigant proceedings – Whether the Court of Appeal erred in quashing the applicant’s appeal and by failing to exercise discretion in the interest of justice when the applicant asked the court to use R. 2.03 of the Rules of Civil Procedure (dispensing with compliance) to continue with the appeal.

The parties have been involved in family law litigation since 2009. On October 29, 2014, Rogin J. of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice awarded custody and child support to Ms. Vermette and access to Mr. Nassr. After numerous proceedings, Mr. Nassr was declared to be a vexatious litigant pursuant to s. 140 of the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C-43, by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice: Vermette v. Nassr, 2015 ONSC 2450. The court ordered that no further proceeding be instituted by Mr. Nassr in any court and “any proceeding previously instituted by him may not be continued except by leave of a Judge of the Superior Court”. After delivering his notice of appeal in respect of the judgment of Rogin J., Mr. Nassr was subsequently denied leave to continue his appeal, the Superior Court finding that he had not met the test for granting leave and there was no merit to the appeal. Ms. Vermette subsequently moved in the Court of Appeal for an order quashing Mr. Nassr’s appeal which was granted. The court did not accept Mr. Nassr’s argument that, under R. 2.03 of the Rules of Civil procedure, R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 194, the court should dispense with compliance with the requirement that he obtain leave. Mr. Nassr seeks leave to appeal that order.