Case information

Civil Procedure – Jurisdiction – Abuse of process – Vexatious litigants – Whether the Court of Appeal for Ontario lacks the precise grant of statutory jurisdiction required to be contained within the Courts of Justice Act to issue an order dismissing an appeal or a motion on an appeal through the application of rule 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure – Whether the decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario with respect to vexatious litigants and vexatious proceedings have undermined the principle of finality and deprived litigants and the legal profession of needed certainty – Rules of Civil Procedure, R.R.O. 1994, Reg. 194.

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.

The Applicant, Ms. Collins filed a Notice of Appeal when the Respondent, Attorney General of Canada was granted a motion to strike the Applicant’s statement of claim. The Applicant then unsuccessfully attempted to have the Registrar of the Court of Appeal issue a Notice of Application addressing the Applicant’s alleged right to accurate and complete transcripts. The Applicant challenged this denial by bringing an application to the Court of Appeal seeking an order that before she is required to pay for transcripts, she be assured they are accurate and complete. The motion was dismissed by the chambers judge based on lack of jurisdiction to issue an originating process such as a Notice of Application. The chambers judge however directed the local registrar to provide the Applicant with a compact disc with the live recording of the relevant proceeding when she paid for and received the transcript. The Applicant was then granted an extension of time to perfect her appeal. The Applicant then brought an application before the Superior Court for a declaration that she be guaranteed accurate and complete transcripts of the court proceedings. Her application was found to be premature as the Court of Appeal had already provided directions on how to proceed. The Applicant then sought to appeal this order. Following this, the Respondents sought an order under rule 2.1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure dismissing the Applicant’s appeal. The order was granted.