The appellant appealed the dismissal of her action for abuse of process, which was based on the allegation that the respondents had brought prior Quebec proceedings challenging a will for an improper purpose.
The trial judge found that the Quebec action was not commenced for an improper purpose, and the Court of Appeal held this factual finding was entitled to deference.
The appellant also argued that the trial judge's comments at the outset of the trial demonstrated a reasonable apprehension of bias.
The Court of Appeal concluded that while some comments were troubling, they did not display a reasonable apprehension of bias when considered in totality.
The appeal was dismissed.
