A. Armstrong

The plaintiff, a self-represented litigant in a wrongful conviction action, brought a motion to appoint a non-lawyer with a history as a vexatious litigant as an amicus curiae to assist him during examinations for discovery.

The Crown defendants brought a cross-motion to exclude the non-lawyer from attending further discoveries due to his disruptive conduct.

The court dismissed the plaintiff's motion, finding that the non-lawyer did not meet the criteria for an amicus curiae and that his appointment would violate the Rules of Civil Procedure and the Law Society Act.

The court granted the Crown defendants' motion, barring the non-lawyer from attending further discoveries due to his history of disruptive behaviour and failure to comply with previous court directions.

The court also permitted the plaintiff to attend the discoveries of the companion action plaintiffs by video or telephone.

The applicant, charged with fraud and theft over $5000, sought a Rowbotham order for state-funded counsel after being denied Legal Aid.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to exhaust his Legal Aid appeals, was not indigent given his household income and discretionary spending, and that the straightforward nature of the charges did not necessitate counsel to ensure a fair trial.