The appellant appealed an order of the Superior Court of Justice dismissing his action against the respondent under Rule 2.1.
The Court of Appeal found that the statement of claim disclosed no cause of action against the respondent and was plainly frivolous and an abuse of process on its face.
The court upheld the dismissal, finding no error in the Superior Court justice's decision to dismiss the claim without inviting written submissions from the appellant.
The court noted that even if written submissions had been provided, based on the appellant's factum and oral argument, there would be no prospect of a different outcome.
