The moving defendants sought to strike the plaintiff's Superior Court action as an abuse of process.
The defendants had previously commenced 67 separate Small Claims Court actions against the plaintiff regarding HVAC rental contracts.
The plaintiff subsequently commenced this Superior Court action against the defendants, seeking damages for breach of contract and defamation, and seeking to traverse or stay the Small Claims Court actions.
The court found that the Superior Court action was duplicative of the plaintiff's defences in the Small Claims Court actions and sought to circumvent the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Court.
The court concluded it would be an abuse of process to permit the Superior Court action to proceed while the Small Claims Court actions were pending, and ordered the action stayed.