Docket: T-1557-15 Prothonotary Richard Morneau Decision November 12, 2015

Date: 20151112

Docket: T-1557-15

Montréal, Quebec, November 12, 2015

PRESENT:    Prothonotary Richard Morneau

BETWEEN:

DAVID RAYMOND AMOS

Plaintiff

and

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

Defendant

ORDER

UPON reviewing the motion records filed by the parties in connection with a motion in writing by the defendant for an order pursuant to rules 221(1)(a) and (c) of the Federal Courts Rules [the rules] striking out the plaintiff’s statement of claim in its entirety, without leave to amend, on the grounds that said claim discloses no reasonable cause of action against the defendant, and that same claim is frivolous and vexatious;

AND UPON being satisfied that this Court can adjudicate on the instant motion without holding an oral hearing;

CONSIDERING that the Court fully agrees with the following analysis contained in paragraphs 17 and 21 of the defendant’s written representations contained in her motion record in chief and filed in support of her motion:

             17. Within the 96 paragraph Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff addresses his complaint in paragraphs 14-24, inclusive. All but four of those paragraphs are dedicated to an incident that occurred in 2006 in and around the legislature in New Brunswick. The jurisdiction of the Federal Court does not extend to Her Majesty the Queen in right of the Provinces. In any event, the Plaintiff hasn’t named the Province or provincial actors as parties to this action. The incident alleged does not give rise to a justiciable cause of action in this Court.

(…)

             21. The few paragraphs that directly address the Defendant provide no details as to the individuals involved or the location of the alleged incidents or other details sufficient to allow the Defendant to respond. As a result, it is difficult or impossible to determine the causes of action the Plaintiff is attempting to advance. A generous reading of the Statement of Claim allows the Defendant to only speculate as to the true and/or intended cause of action. At best, the Plaintiff’s action may possibly be summarized as: he suspects he is barred from the House of Commons.

[footnotes omitted]

Based on the foregoing, I conclude that it is plain and obvious that the statement of claim discloses no reasonable claim and that it is fundamentally vexatious. Furthermore, I see no possibility that it could be salvaged by way of further amendment.

Consequently, this Court hereby orders that:

1.      The plaintiff’s statement of claim is struck out in its entirety, without leave to amend.

2.      No costs are awarded to the defendant since none were requested by same.

“Richard Morneau”

Prothonotary